Division 


Section 


TB>525  GX 


OUTLINES 


OF 


THE  SYNOPTIC   RECORD 


OUTLINES  r  JAN  30  1932   * 
OF  ^^ 


THE  SYNOPTIC  RECORD 

BEING 

A  SUMMARY  OF  THE  NARRATIVE 
OF  THE  FIRST  THREE  GOSPELS  IN 
THE  LIGHT  OF  MODERN   CRITICISM 

BY  THE 

REV.  BERNARD   HUGH   BOSANQUET,   M.A. 

VICAR    OF  THAMES    DITTON 
AfcD 

REGINALD   A.  WENHAM,    M.A. 


NEW  YORK :    LONGMANS,  GREEN,  &  CO. 
LONDON :  EDWARD  ARNOLD 
1904 

All  rights  reserved 


PREFACE 

In  view  of  the  increasing  publicity  which  is  being 
given  to  the  results  of  Gospel  criticism  and,  particularly, 
to  the  marked  advance  which  has  been  made  toward 
a  solution  of  the  Synoptic  Problem,  it  is  incumbent 
on  teachers  to  adapt  thereto  both  the  method  and 
substance  of  their  treatment  of  the  Gospel  narratives. 
With  this  end  in  view  we  have  attempted,  in  this  book, 
to  treat  the  first  three  Gospels  not  separately,  in  detailed 
analysis,  but  together  in  the  relations  which  they  bear 
to  their  sources  and  to  one  another.  We  hope  that 
this  book  will  also  meet  the  requirements  of  those  who 
have  neither  the  time  nor  the  inclination  to  undertake 
the  more  detailed  and  irksome  task  of  studying  each 
Gospel  by  means  of  commentaries,  which,  while  eluci- 
dating the  parts,  often  tend  to  obscure  the  whole.  At 
the  same  time,  it  lays  no  claim  to  be  a  '  Life  of  Christ,' 
but  is  rather  to  be  used  as  a  means  whereby  a  know- 
ledge of  facts  may  be  acquired  on  which  to  base  such 
further  study.  Moreover,  to  write  a  Life  of  Christ  would 
have  involved  a  very  different  treatment  of  the  Fourth 
Gospel.  As  it  is,  we  have  only  used  that  Gospel  so  far 
as  seemed  necessary  in  order  to  elucidate  the  contents 


vi  PREFACE 

of  the  first  three.  To  discuss  the  doctrinal  questions 
involved,  which  are  associated  particularly  with  the 
Fourth  Gospel,  would  be  out  of  place  in  a  text-book 
of  this  kind  ;  and  we  feel  that  the  treatment  of  such 
questions  is  best  left  to  the  individual  teacher. 

It  should  be  mentioned  that  Mr.  R.  A.  Wenham  is 
responsible  for  the  Introductory  chapter  on  the  Synoptic 
Problem,  and  for  Chapter  XV  on  Eschatology,  and  the 
Rev.  B.  H.  Bosanquet  for  the  remaining  chapters. 

B.  H.  B. 

R.  A.  W. 
September,  1904. 


CONTENTS 

INTRODUCTION. 

PAGE 

I.   The  Synoptic  Peoblem 1 

II.   The  Priority  of  St.  Mark    ....  7 

Appendix  A.     The  Oral  Hypothesis .         .         .  15 

Appendix  B.     St.  Mark  and  the  First  Source  .  21 

III.    The  Second  Source 24 

Appendix  C.     St.  Mark  and  the  Logia       .         .  29 

Appendix  D.     St.  Luke's  Preface  (i.  1-14)         .  30 

Appendix  E.     Papias  and  the  Synoptists  .         .  31 

CHAPTER   L 

The  Infancy  and  Childhood  .         .         .         .34 

Additional  Note  I.     The    Genealogies  (Matt. 

i.  1-18;  Luke  iii.  23-38)       ....       45 
Additional    Note   II.     On    the   Date   of  the 

Birth  of  Jesus) 47 

CHAPTER   II. 
The  Baptist 51 

CHAPTER   III. 
The  Temptation  and  Early  Ministry  in  Judaea       65 

CHAPTER  IV. 
Opening  of  Galilean  Ministry     .         .         .         .77 

CHAPTER  V. 

The  Teaching  of  Jesus          .         .         .  .         .86 

Additional    Note.      The    Teaching  of    Jesus 

on  Prayer      .          .         .         .          .  .          .97 

CHAPTER  VI. 
The  Opposition  to  Jesus 104 


viii  CONTENTS 


PAGE 


CHAPTER  VII. 
The  Call  of  the  Twelve 119 

CHAPTER  VIII. 
The  Teaching  by  Parables 127 

CHAPTER   IX. 
Period  of  Popular  Reception        .         .         .         .141 

CHAPTER  X. 
The  Crisis  of  the  Galilean  Ministry         .         .156 

CHAPTER   XI. 
The  Close  of  the  Ministry  in  Galilee      .         .173 

CHAPTER   XII. 
The  Transfiguration  and  after  .         .         .         .187 
Additional  Note.     St.  Luke's  Great  Insertion     203 

CHAPTER  XIII. 
The  Last  Journey  to  Jerusalem  .         .         .205 

CHAPTER   XIV. 
The  Last  Week  of  the  Ministry         .         .         .218 
Additional  Note.     The  Herodians  .         .230 

CHAPTER   XV. 

ESCHATOLOGICAL    TEACHING 232 

CHAPTER   XVI. 

The  Passion 249 

Additional  Note.     On  the  Chronology  of  the 
Passion 261 

CHAPTER   XVII. 
The  Risen  Christ 268 

INDEX 279 


INTRODUCTION 

I.   THE  SYNOPTIC  PROBLEM. 

This  problem  is  concerned  not  with  one  alone  of  the 
first  three  Gospels,  but  with  all :  it  is  not  Matthaean, 
Marcan,  or  Lucan  only,  but  Synoptic.  It  is  internal  and 
not  external,  concerned  not  with  the  relations  of  the 
first  three  Gospels  to  the  fourth,  but  with  the  mutual 
relations  between  the  Synoptists  themselves.  It  is  not 
merely  a  problem  but  the  problem,  for  not  any  and  every 
question,  but  one  particular  question  is  of  pre-eminent 
importance. 

In  comparing  the  Synoptists  together,  the  attention 
of  many  is  arrested  more  by  the  discrepancies  than  by 
anything  else.  That  differences  exist  and  call  for 
explanation  may  be  at  once  admitted.     There  are 

(i)  Differences  of  order  and  arrangement ; 

(ii)  Differences  of  detail,  especially  of  time,  place, 
and  number ;  e.g. 

(i)  Almost  the  whole  of  the  teaching  which  is  placed 
after  the  appointment  of  the  Twelve,  in  St.  Luke's 
version  of  the  Sermon  on  the  Mount  (Luke  vi.  20-49), 
is  placed  in  St.  Matthew  at  the  beginning  of  the  Gali- 
lean ministry  (Matt,  v-vii). 

(ii)  In  the  incident  of  the  cursing  of  the  fig-tree, 
according  to  St.  Mark  the  fig-tree  is  cursed  on  one  day 
(Mark  xi.   12-14),   and  is  seen  to  be  withered  on  the 

B 


2      OUTLINES  OF  THE  SYNOPTIC  RECORD 

next  (Mark  xi.  20-25).  Verses  19  and  20  show  clearly 
that  there  is  an  intervening  night.  From  St.  Matthew, 
on  the  other  hand,  we  obtain  the  impression  that  on 
one  and  the  same  day  the  tree  was  cursed,  withered 
away,  and  became  an  object-lesson  to  the  beholders. 
Differences  of  place  and  number  are  clearly  seen  in 
the  narrative  of  the  healing  of  the  blind  man  at  Jericho 
(Mark  x.  46-52  =  Matt.  xx.  29-34  =  Luke  xviii.  35-43). 
According  to  St.  Mark  and  St.  Luke  there  is  one  blind 
man ;  according  to  St.  Matthew  there  are  two.  Ac- 
cording to  St.  Mark  and  St.  Matthew  the  incident 
took  place  while  going  out  of  Jericho ;  according  to 
St.  Luke  while  drawing  nigh  to  Jericho. 

Such  discrepancies  as  these  have  taxed  the  ingenuity 
of  harmonists  for  generations,  and  have  attracted  a  great 
deal  of  attention  in  disputes  about  the  nature  of  inspira- 
tion. But  the  Synoptic  problem  is  neither  harmonistic 
nor  doctrinal,  for  it  is  not  primarily  concerned  with  such 
discrepancies.  No  Gospel  student  can  have  failed  to 
observe  that  many  passages  in  one  Gospel  have  their 
counterpart  in  another;  many  incidents  are  placed  in 
identical  contexts;  and  there  is  a  marked  similarity 
of  treatment  in  narrating  Jesus'  work  and  teaching. 
This  is  a  phenomenon  that  is  really  much  more  im- 
portant than  phenomena  of  difference  :  and  when  the 
resemblances  of  the  Synoptic  Gospels  have  been  ex- 
plained, it  will  probably  be  found  that  it  will  then  be 
easier  to  explain  their  differences. 

It  will  be  necessary  to  state  the  facts  of  such 
resemblance  in  some  detail  before  proceeding  to  give 
an  account  of  the  theories  proposed  for  solution. 
The  resemblances  may  be  classified  as  (i)  general, 
(ii)  particular. 


INTRODUCTION  3 

(i)  General. 

The  agreement  in  selection  of  subject-matter  is 
remarkable.  We  read  in  St.  John  (xxi.  25),  'Now  there 
are  also  many  other  things,  which  Jesus  did,  and  if 
each  one  of  these  were  written  down,  I  think  that  even 
the  world  itself  would  not  contain  the  books  written.' 
These  '  other  things '  are  evidently  far  more  numerous 
than  those  contained  in  the  first  three  canonical  Gospels. 
The  writers,  without  doubt,  only  made  a  selection  out 
of  a  large  mass  of  material  known  to  them,  and  yet 
they  made  substantially  the  same  selection.  Their 
arrangement  of  this  selected  matter  is  also,  to  a  great 
extent,  the  same.  Not  only  is  the  whole  substance  of 
St.  Mark's  Gospel  contained  in  the  other  two,  but  his 
order  also  is  the  order  of  St.  Matthew  or  St.  Luke,  and 
often  that  of  both.  Nor  is  this  order  always  chrono- 
logical. Many  incidents  are  grouped  together  by  the 
connexion  of  their  subject-matter  or  for  convenience 
of  treatment.  In  the  remarkably  full  narrative  of 
the  last  days  at  Jerusalem  the  question  put  by  the 
Sadduceesto  Jesus  (Mark  xii.  18-27  =  Matt.  xxii.  23-33= 
Luke  xx.  27-38)  is  preceded  in  all  three  Gospels  by  the 
question  of  the  Pharisees,  and  followed  by  the  question 
of  the  scribe.  St.  Luke  has  only  an  allusion  to  this. 
Each  of  the  three  then  proceeds  to  narrate  Jesus' 
question  about  the  Messiah.  It  is  improbable  that 
there  was  an  actual  chronological  sequence  of  four 
questions,  which  caused  the  agreement  in  order :  it  is 
still  more  improbable  that  three  men,  writing  inde- 
pendently, should  have  chanced  upon  the  same  arrange- 
ment. 

(ii)  Particular. 

The  correspondence  in  phraseology  is  also  remark- 
able.    This  is  seen  in  the  Greek  form,  not  only  of  the 

B2 


4       OUTLINES  OF  THE  SYNOPTIC  RECORD 

narrative,  but  also  of  the  words  of  Jesus,  which  were 
spoken  in  Aramaic.  A  striking  instance  is  the  narra- 
tive of  the  paralytic  at  Capernaum  (Matt.  ix.  1-8  = 
Mark  ii.  l-12  =  Luke  v.  17-26). 


Matt.  ix.  1-8. 

Kal  k/xfids  els  ttXoiov 
oienlpaaev,  teal  rj\9ev 
(Is  ttjv  Ibiav  ttoXiv.  Kal 
Idob  npoaecpepov  avrat 
napaXvTiKov  km  KXivrjs 
P(@Xr)p.(VOV.  Kal  ISobv 
6  'Itjgovs  TTjV  tt'httiv 
avrujv    (Ttrev  rw   irapa- 

XvTlKto    ®dpO~(l,   T(KVOV 

a(pi€i>Tai  aov  at  dpiap- 
riai.  Kal  ISov  rives  tojv 
ypa/x/xaT(cov  (Tirav  kv 
kavrois  Ovtos  (3Xaa<prj- 
fxei.  Kal  (Idas  b  'Irjaovs 
rd?  kv9vpit)o'(is  ovtwv 
(Ttt(v  "\va  ri  kv9vfx(Ta,9( 
irovrjpd  kv  rah  Kapoiais 
vpiwv  •  rl  -jap  kanv  (v- 
Konajrepov,  tiirtiv  'A<pi- 
(vto'i  aov  at  dpLapTiat,  t) 
(Ittuv  "Eyeipe  Kal  irepi- 
■naTH  ;  tva  Se  (18t}t(  on 
k£ovaiav  €X€t  °  v'l0S  T°v 
avOpwirov  km  T7/J  777? 
d(pi(vai  a/xaprlas-  totc 
\eya  to>  irapaXvTiKw 
"Eyap(  apov  acv  tt)v 
KXivrjv  Kal  vnay(  (Is  tov 
oltov  aov.  Kal  kytpOds 
aiTT)\6cv  ds  TOV  OIKOV 
avrov.  'ISovtcs  de  ol 
ox^oi  k<po&i)9r)Oav  Kal 
(56£aaav  tjv  9(bv  ruv 


Mark  ii.  1-12. 

Kal  (lo~(\6aiv  iraXiv 
ds  Ka(papvaov/x  01'  rjpie- 
pwv  r\KovaBr)  on  kv  o'ikqo 
kariv  Kal  avvi]yO~q(yav 
ttoXXoI  oj(TT(  fiTjKeri  x<w- 

p(?V    fJLT]S(     TO.    Vpbs    T?)l/ 

9vpav,  Kal  kXdXa  avrois 
tov  Xoyov.  Kal  'ipxov- 
rai  (p(povr(s  npbs  avTov 
vapaXvTiKov  alpofxevov 
vnb  T(ffaapcov.  Kal  fxr) 
5vva/j.(voi  wpoawkyKai 
avTo)  hid  rov  oxXov 
d-ntGTkyaaav  tt)v  are- 
yrjv  'ottov  rjv^  Kal  k£opv- 
£avT(s  xa^wo-i  tov  Kpd- 
!3aTT0v  ottov  b  TrapaXv- 

TlKoS      KaT(K(LTO.  KO.I 

lb(bv  b  'Irjaovs  tt)v  tt'iotiv 
avTcov  Xeya  tw  irapa- 
XvTiKcp  T(kvov,  d<pl(VTai 
crov  at  d/j.npTiai.  -qoav 
ok  tiv(s  tuiv  ypa/xpia- 
t(qjv  kKei  Ka9rj[x(voi  Kal 
oiaXoyi^6p(voi  kv  toTs 
KapSlais  avTwv  Tt  ovtos 
ovTOjXaXeT;  PXacnprj/xu- 
tis  ovvaTai  d<ptkvai 
dfxapTias  d  /xr)  (Is  6 
6(6s  ;  Kal  (i>9vs  kmyvovs 
b  'Irjaovs  to)  irv(vp.aTi 
avTov  oTi  [ovtojs']  Sia- 
Xoyi^uvTai     kv     kavTofs 


=     Luke  v.  17-26. 

Kal  kykv(To  kv  pud 
twv  fimpaiv  Kal  avTos 
t)v  oihaCKCDV,  Kal  rjaav 
Ka6r)fX(voi  Qapioaioi  Kal 
vopLoBiMcTKaXot  ot  r\oav 
kXrjXvQoT(s  (K  irdo-rjs 
KojpLrjS  T77J  YaXiXaias  Kal 
'iouSatas  ical  ,\(povo~a- 
X.f)p.'  Kal  ovvapus  Kvplov 
r)v  ds  to  IdaOai  avrov. 
Kal  Idoit  dvop(s  <pkpovT(s 
krrl  KXivrjs  di>6pajTTov  os 
r^v  TrapaX(Xvpi(vos,  Kal 
ktyrovv  avrov  dff(v(y- 
K(iv  Kal  6(Tvai  [avTov~\ 
kvwTTiov  avrov.  Kal  fir) 
(vpovT(s  iroias  (ia(V(y- 
kojviv  avrov  Sid  tov 
oxXov  dva/3avT(s  km  to 
dcbfxa  Sid  twv  K(pdpia)v 
Ka9rJKav  avrbv  trvv  t£> 
KXivioito  ds  to  fikaov 
(fXTTpoa9(v  tov  'Irjaov. 
Kal  Iduiv  tt)v  tt'iotiv 
avrebv  (7tt(v  ,'Av9pa)TT(, 
depkeovrai  aoi  al  d/xap- 
Tiat  aov.  Kal  r)p£avTo 
5iaXoyl£(a9ai  ol  ypapi- 
ptaTus  Kal  ol  Qapiaatoi 
XkyovT(s  Tis  kariv  ovtos 
bs  XaXd  (3Xaa<pT)pitas  ; 
tis  ovvarai  dfxaprlas 
d<p(ivai    (I  ptr)  fj.6vos   b 


INTRODUCTION 


Matt.  ix.  1-8. 
Suvtcl  k£ovoiav  Toiavrt] 
tois  dvOpunois. 


=       Mark  ii.  1-12. 

/  \kyei  [avTofs]  Tt  ravra 
SiaKoyifcoOe  kv  rais 
tcapfiiais  vpiwv  ;  ri  ka- 
Tiv  evKond/TcpoVj  elntiv 
to)  TTapakvTitccv  'Acp'uv- 
rai  gov  al  dpapriai, 
77    dirtiv  'Ey  upov  [/cat] 

apOV  TOV  Kpa&GLTTOV 
GOV    KOI    TTipiTTCLTei  J    IVO. 

ok  d8iJT€  07i  kgovaiav 
«X«  o  vlbs  tov  avQpu:- 
vov  d(pikvai  dpaprias 
kvl  ttjs  777?-  A«'76t  tw 
TrapaXvTiKcv  2>,ol  \kyw, 
eyeipe  dpov  tov  KpdfiaT- 
Tor  oov  Kal  viraye  els 
tw  oTkov  gov.  real 
i,yep9rj  Kal  evObs  dpas 
tov  tcpdficLTTOV  l^XQeV 
i finpoGOev TtdvTwv ,  woTe 
l£i<jTaa#at  iravras  /cat 
5o£a£eiv  tov  Oebv  [Xe- 
70^x05]  on  Ovtojs  ov- 
51ttot€  e'ioapiev. 


-.     Luke  v.  17-26. 

deos  ;  kirtyvobs  5k  6 
'Itjgovs  Toiis  SiaXoyi- 
Gp.ovs  avTwv  diro/cpidels 
elrrev  vpbs  avTovs  Ii 
5iaXoyi£eo0e  kv  Tais 
Kapoiais  vpiojv;    t'l    ka- 

TIV     tVK01TWT(pOV,    (llTeiV 

'AcpiwvTai  Got  at  dp.ap- 
Tiai  Gov,  r)  e'meiv"  Ey  eipe 
Kal  irepiirdTei  ;  iVa  5e 
eloiJTe  on  o  vlbs  tov 
dvOpuittov  k£ovGiav  ex€l 
knl  TTJs  yijs  dcpitvai 
dpiapTtas-  elnev  tw  ira- 
paXeXvpievw  ^,01  Xeyoj, 
eyeipe  Kal  dpas  to  kXi- 
vioiov  Gov  vopevov  els 
tov  oTkov  gov.  Kal  7ra- 
paxpfjpLO-  dvaGTas  kvdi- 
ttiov  avTwv,  dpas  k<p'  0 
KaTiKeiTO,  dnrjXOev  els 
tov  oJkov  avTOv  bo£dfav 
tov  6e6v.  Kat  eKGraGis 
eXafiev  dnavTas  Kal  e56- 
£a£ov  tov  6e6v,  Kal 
krtKr]a9i]Gav  (pofiov  Xe- 
yovTes  on  Eidap.ev  na- 
pdoo£a  G-qpiepov. 


In  this  passage  the  point  most  noticeable  of  all  is 
the  treatment  of  words  of  Jesus  contained  in  Mark  ii. 
10-12.  Jesus  is  addressing  the  Pharisees  and  suddenly 
turns  to  the  paralytic.  The  final  clause  (fva  Sk  etS^re  .  .  .» 
'  but  that  ye  may  know  .  .  .')  is  spoken  to  the  former; 
but  the  principal  clause  to  the  latter  (o-oi  Xeyw  .  .  .,  'I  say 
unto  thee  .  .  .').  St.  Mark  retains  this  dramatic  turn 
to  the  paralytic  by  the  device  of  a  parenthesis  (Ae'ya  t£ 


6       OUTLINES  OF  THE  SYNOPTIC  RECORD 

■n-apa\vTiK<Z,  '  He  saith  to  the  paralytic').     In  this  he  is  in 
exact  agreement  with  the  other  two  Evangelists. 

Such  striking  phenomena  of  agreement  can  hardly 
be  set  down  either  to  inspiration  or  to  chance.  '  No 
one  at  present  would  maintain  with  some  of  the  older 
scholars  of  the  Reformation  that  the  coincidences  be- 
tween the  Gospels  are  due  simply  to  the  direct  and 
independent  action  of  the  same  Spirit  upon  the  several 
writers '  (Westcott,  Introduction  to  the  Study  of  the  Gos- 
pels, p.  193).  Equally  impossible  is  it  to  suppose  that 
independent  writers  could  have  happened  accidentally 
to  employ  language  which  is  so  nearly  identical.  The 
only  explanation  lies  in  some  literary  connexion.  In 
comparing  two  documents  together,  if  it  be  found  that 
they  (a)  deal  with  the  same  subject  in  the  same  way, 
(b)  arrange  incidents  in  the  same  order,  and  (c)  employ 
language  that  is  identical,  two  explanations  will  occur 
to  the  mind  ;  either  that  one  writer  has  borrowed  from 
the  other,  or  that  both  have  borrowed  from  a  third 
writer.  So  in  the  case  of  the  Synoptists,  there  are  two 
possible  solutions  of  the  problem- of  resemblances  ;  either 
(i)  that  one  has  borrowed  from  another  (Borrowing 
Hypothesis),  or  (ii)  that  they  have  used  some  other 
authority  (Hypothesis  of  a  Common  Source). 


(i)  Borrowing  Hypothesis. 

The  theory  may  be  put  forward  in  many  forms.  There 
is  scarcely  one  of  the  possible  permutations  and  com- 
binations which  has  not  been  advocated  at  one  time  or 
another.  One  of  the  most  notable  is  that  of  Augustine, 
who,  speaking  of  St.  Mark,  says  (de  Cons.  Ev.  i.  4), 
1  Matthaeum  secutus  tanquam  pedissequus  et  brevia- 
tor.'     No  form  of  the  Borrowing  Hypothesis,  however, 


INTRODUCTION  7 

has  been  found  to  satisfy  all  the  requirements  of  the 
case. 

(ii)   Theory  of  a  Common  Source. 

Of  this  theory  again  it  may  be  said  that  there  are 
various  forms,  according  as  we  postulate  one  or  more 
sources,  and  that  no  form  is  in  itself  a  complete 
solution  of  the  problem. 

The  following  discussion  will  show  that  for  passages 
where  St.  Matthew  or  St.  Luke  is  parallel  to  St.  Mark 
the  explanation  lies  in  a  particular  form  of  the  Borrow- 
ing Hypothesis  (that  St.  Mark  lay  before  St.  Matthew 
and  St.  Luke) ;  while  for  passages  where  St.  Matthew  is 
not  parallel  to  St.  Mark,  but  only  to  St.  Luke,  an 
external  common  source  is  postulated.  In  the  first 
case  the  source  is  one  of  our  existing  documents,  and 
the  other  two  have  borrowed  from  it :  in  the  second  the 
source  is  not  one  of  our  three  Gospels,  and  indeed  no 
longer  exists. 


II.   THE  PRIORITY  OF  ST.  MARK. 

It  has  been  already  pointed  out  that,  in  the  dis- 
cussion of  the  Synoptic  problem,  a  distinction  must 
be  drawn  between  (a)  passages  which  other  Gospels 
possess  in  common  with  St.  Mark,  and  (b)  passages 
in  which  the  parallelism  is  confined  to  St.  Matthew 
and  St.  Luke.  It  is  only  with  the  former  set  of 
passages  that  this  section  deals.  As  almost  everj*- 
thing  in  St.  Mark  has  its  parallel  in  one  or  both  of  the 
other  Gospels,  it  is  clear  that  St.  Mark  is  the  shortest  of 
the  three  just  because  it  contains  so  little  that  is  not 


8       OUTLINES  OF  THE  SYNOPTIC  RECORD 

also  found  in  St.  Matthew  or  St.  Luke.  Two  ex- 
planations of  this  phenomenon  may  be  given;  either 
that  both  St.  Matthew  and  St.  Luke  used  St.  Mark,  or 
that  St.  Mark  used  both  St.  Matthew  and  St.  Luke. 
The  former  theory  is  known  as  the  theory  of  the 
priority  of  St.  Mark,  the  latter  as  the  combination 
theory. 

No  other  theories  are  really  possible.  For  if  these 
passages  are  considered  generally,  it  will  be  seen  that 
there  are  three  sets  of  them ;  in  the  first  place  those  in 
which  St.  Matthew  and  St.  Mark  only  are  parallel ;  in 
the  second  place  those  in  which  St.  Matthew,  St.  Mark, 
and  St.  Luke  are  parallel ;  and  in  the  third  place  those 
in  which  St.  Mark  and  St.  Luke  only  are  parallel.  Only  in 
the  second  set  of  passages,  where  St.  Matthew,  St.  Mark, 
and  St.  Luke  are  parallel,  is  it  possible  to  suppose 
that  St.  Matthew  used  St.  Luke,  or  St.  Luke  used 
St.  Matthew.  And  this  would  only  be  possible  if  these 
passages  contained  agreements  in  phraseology  between 
St.  Matthew  and  St.  Luke,  which  were  not  also  shared 
by  St.  Mark.  But,  as  a  matter  of  fact,  the  phrases  in 
which  St.  Matthew  and  St.  Luke,  as  it  were,  agree  to 
differ  from  St.  Mark  are  so  few  and  unimportant  that 
for  the  present  they  may  be  ignored  without  in  any 
way  prejudicing  the  argument.  As  a  general  rule 
St.  Matthew  and  St.  Luke  are  only  in  agreement  in 
this  set  of  passages  when  that  agreement  is  shared 
by  St.  Mark. 

If,  therefore,  neither  St.  Matthew  used  St.  Luke,  nor 
St.  Luke  St.  Matthew,  it  is  clear  that  the  only  admis- 
sible explanations  are  the  theory  of  the  priority  of  St. 
Mark  and  the  combination  theory.  The  possible  rela- 
tions of  the  three  Gospels  may  be  seen  in  the  following 
diagram  : — 


INTRODUCTION 

(i)  Priority  of  St.  Mark.  (ii)  Combination  theory. 

Mark.  Matt.    Luke. 


Matt.    Luke.  Mark. 

These  two  theories  are  mutually  exclusive.  To  dis- 
prove the  combination  theory  is  to  prove  the  priority 
of  St.  Mark,  an  achievement  which  may  now  be  con- 
sidered one  of  the  best  established  results  of  gospel 
criticism. 

An  isolated  example  will  show  the  antecedent  possi- 
bility of  either  theory. 

Matt.  viii.  16  =  Mark  i.  32  =        Luke  iv.  40. 

(i)   dipias  5e  yevofj.evr)s,  oxf/las  5e  yeyo/j.€vr]s, 

(ii)  ore  ZZvotv  6  f,\ios,         Zvvovtos  blrovfjXiov, 

(iii)  YIpoarjveyKav  avTa>.  .  .    2<pepov  irpbs  clvtov.  .  .    ecpepov  npos  avrov.  .  . 

where  (i)  is  common  to  St.  Matthew  and  St.  Mark, 
(ii)  to  St.  Luke  and  St.  Mark,  and  (iii)  to  St.  Matthew, 
St.  Luke,  and  St.  Mark.  On  the  one  hand  we  may  say 
that  St.  Matthew  selected  from  St.  Mark  one  part  of  an 
apparently  redundant  expression,  and  St.  Luke  selected 
another  (priority  of  St.  Mark) ;  on  the  other  hand,  that 
St.  Mark  combines  an  expression  taken  from  St.  Matthew 
with  an  expression  taken  from  St.  Luke  (combination 
theory). 

The  following  are  the  chief  arguments  against  the 
combination  theory : — 

(i)  According  to  this  theory  St.  Mark,  though  the  latest 
writer,  has  added  hardly  anything  to  the  narrative  of  his 
predecessors,  St.  Matthew  and  St.  Luke.  It  is  hard  to 
understand  what  purpose  could  be  served  by  merely 
abbreviating  narratives  which  already  existed.  Moreover, 
if  the  Gospel  of  St.  Mark  really  embodies  the  reminiscences 
of  Peter — a  conclusion  strongly  supported  both  by 
ancient  tradition  and  internal  evidence — it  is  not  easy  to 


10     OUTLINES  OF  THE  SYNOPTIC  RECORD 

understand  why  it  contains  so  little  that  is  new,  and  why 
it  is  almost  entirely  dependent  on  the  other  two  Synoptic 
Gospels  :  according  to  the  combination  theory  it's  cha- 
racter is  Matthaean  and  Lucan,  rather  than  Petrine. 
As  a  matter  of  fact,  the  later  the  date  of  a  gospel,  the 
more  likely  is  it  that  the  later  writer  should  introduce 
new  matter,  or  tell  an  old  story  in  a  new  way.  Thus  most 
of  the  matter  contained  in  the  Fourth  Gospel  is  not  found 
in  the  Synoptic  Gospels,  although  the  author  of  the 
Fourth  Gospel  is  evidently  acquainted  with  them.  But 
if,  on  the  other  hand,  St.  Matthew  and  St.  Luke  used 
St.  Mark,  their  procedure  is  easy  to  understand,  for  each 
added  much  to  the  narrative  of  his  predecessor. 

(ii)  If  St.  Mark  was  the  latest  writer,  his  procedure 
seems  to  have  been  extremely  artificial  and  arbitrary. 
He  preferred  at  one  time  St.  Luke,  and  at  another 
St.  Matthew,  and  was  apparently  guided  by  no  prin- 
ciple in  his  preference.  In  the  following  example 
St.  Mark's  narrative  is,  according  to  the  combination 
theory,  a  mere  mosaic  of  Matthaean  and  Lucan 
phraseology : — 

Mark  ii.  21,  22. 

ouSeis     emPXnfia     pdicous    dyvafyov     eiripa7rrei    eiri    ifxaTior 

iraXaiov"    el  8e  /xy,  aipei  to  TrXi]pwjuia  ctTr'  ciutou   to   kclivov  tov 

iraXaiov,  kcu  xe^P0,/  o-\io-[i.a.  yiverai.      kcu  ouSets   PdXXei   olvov 

viov  eis  aeneous  iraXaiou's'      el  8e  fAT),  prf^et   6   oTvo?  tovs  ao-Koi'?, 

kcu  6  chi/o$  airoXXurat  k<x!  ol  aaKoi'    aXXd   olvov  viov  eis  acrKOus 

Kcuyous. 

Mark  =  Luke.     Underlined. 
Mark  =  Matthew.     Thick  type. 

Moreover,  in  such  a  passage  as  this  it  should  be 
observed  that  where  St.  Matthew  and  St.  Luke  use 
the  same  phrase,  that  phrase  is  usually  to  be  found  in 


INTRODUCTION  11 

St.  Mark.  According  to  the  combination  theory,  we 
must  say  that  St.  Mark  selected  those  phrases  in 
which  St.  Matthew  and  St.  Luke  agreed. 

A  simpler  and  therefore  better  explanation  of  such 
passages  as  this  is  to  suppose  that  St.  Mark  was  used 
by  St.  Matthew  and  St.  Luke. 

(hi)  A  third  argument  against  the  combination  theory 
may  be  drawn  from  a  comparison  of  the  order  of  the 
several  Gospels.  Down  to  the  narrative  of  the  call  of 
the  first  disciples  St.  Mark's  order  agrees  with  that  of 
St.  Matthew ;  from  this  point  to  the  feeding  of  the  five 
thousand  it  closely  agrees  with  that  of  St.  Luke  ;  and 
after  this  with  that  of  both  St.  Matthew  and  St.  Luke. 
Moreover,  if  St.  Mark  used  St.  Matthew  and  St.  Luke, 
he  must  have  omitted  a  great  deal  that  is  found  in  both 
these  Gospels.  Among  such  omissions  must  be  classed 
the  Sermon  on  the  Mount,  for  neither  in  following 
St.  Matthew  nor  in  following  St.  Luke  does  St.  Mark 
insert  this  and  similar  matter.  Such  omission  is  difficult 
to  account  for.  Nor  is  it  easy  to  understand  why  he 
should  prefer  the  order  now  of  the  one  and  now  of  the 
other.  But  if  these  two  had  St.  Mark  before  them 
their  agreement  in  order  would  be  easily  explicable, 
and  when  one  of  them  does  diverge  from  the  order  of 
St.  Mark,  it  is  for  some  special  reason,  which  it  is  some- 
times easy  to  conjecture.  St.  Mark's  context  may  have 
suggested  additional  matter,  which  might  suitably  be 
inserted  at  this  point.  When  this  has  been  inserted, 
the  writer  will  often  be  found  to  return  to  St.  Mark's 
order,  going  back  to  the  point  at  which  he  diverged 
from  it. 


12     OUTLINES  OF  THE  SYNOPTIC  RECORD 

e.g.  Mark.  Luke. 

x.  46-end  =  xviii.  35-end  (Healing  of  Bartimaeus  at 

Jericho). 
independent  ({^  llQ  (Zacchaeus  at  Jericho)_ 

Luke  y  {        Y  l~21  (Parable  of  the  Pounds)- 

xi.  1-11  =  xix.  28-38  (Triumphal  entry), 

i.e.  St.  Luke  at  xix.  28  returns  to  St.  Mark's  context,  which  he  left 
at  xix.  1. 

(iv)  Both  (a)  in  style  and  (b)  in  general  presentation 
we  should  expect  the  narrative  of  the  latest  Gospel  to  be 
the  least  original. 

(a)  St.  Mark  is  especially  graphic  and  rugged,  while 
either  St.  Matthew  or  St.  Luke,  or  sometimes  both, 
soften  down  expressions  which  appear  awkward  or 
difficult.  For  example,  in  Mark  ii.  16  ore  is  used  for 
'  why ' ;  both  St.  Matthew  and  St.  Luke  substitute  the 
commoner  Sia,  tL  Or  they  will  put  some  interpretation 
upon  St.  Mark's  statements  which  is  not  necessarily 
contained  in  the  words  themselves  :  e.  g.  after  the  '  day 
at  Capernaum '  (Mark  i),  Jesus  said  to  the  disciples, 
'  Let  us  go  elsewhere,  for  for  this  purpose  came  I  out,' 
i.  e.  from  Capernaum  (eh  tovto  yap  igrjkOov).  St.  Luke 
has  '  since  for  this  purpose  was  I  sent,'  i.  e.  into  the 
world. 

Or  one  will  omit  a  Marcan  passage  and  yet  show  by 
his  language  that  he  had  it  before  him :  e.  g.  St.  Mark 
in  his  account  of  the  healing  of  the  paralytic  at  Caper- 
naum narrates  the  striking  manner  in  which  the  sick 
man's  friends  showed  their  faith,  and  overcame  ob- 
stacles. St.  Matthew  does  not  describe  this,  but  retains 
St.  Mark's  words,  '  and  seeing  their  faith.' 

(6)  In  the  presentation  of  the  history  the  narrative  of 
St.  Mark  is  original  rather  than  secondary.  A  feature 
of  his  Gospel  is  the  gradual  development  of  the  claims  of 


INTRODUCTION  13 

Jesus  as  Messiah ;  also,  on  the  one  hand,  of  the  opposi- 
tion to  them  on  the  part  of  the  Pharisees,  and,  on  the 
other,  of  their  acceptance  by  the  disciples.  This  is 
difficult  to  explain  as  the  result  merely  of  artificial 
arrangement  on  the  part  of  the  composer,  but  is  intrin- 
sically convincing  as  pointing  to  the  historical  facts  of 
the  case.  Both  in  St.  Luke  and  St.  Matthew,  however, 
all  this  is  obscured.  The  '  great  Insertion '  in  St.  Luke 
(ix.  51-xviii.  14)  interrupts  the  narrative  and  the  course 
of  historical  development. 

Still  more  is  this  seen  to  be  the  case  by  comparing 
St.  Matthew  with  St.  Mark.  In  St.  Mark  the  people  do 
not  recognize  Jesus  as  Messiah  at  first,  and  are  after- 
wards discouraged  from  doing  so,  until  the  time  of  the 
triumphal  entry.  This  was  necessary  in  order  that  men 
might  be  led  to  adopt  Jesus'  views  about  the  Messianic 
Kingdom  and  the  Messiah,  rather  than  to  believe  that 
He  would  adopt  or  countenance  their  own  ideas.  Mira- 
cles in  particular  were  likely  to  lead  to  misunderstand- 
ing and  to  a  premature  acceptance  of  claims  that  were 
not  yet  understood.  The  injunctions  to  secrecy  imposed 
by  Jesus,  according  to  St.  Mark,  are  therefore  of  great 
importance  for  a  true  appreciation  of  the  history ;  but 
in  St.  Matthew  they  lose  their  significance.  In 
St.  Mark's  narrative  of  the  raising  of  Jairus'  daughter 
secrecy  is  strictly  commanded  (Mark  v.  43) :  in 
St.  Matthew's  narrative,  on  the  other  hand,  no  such 
command  is  found.  Again  in  Mark  vi.  14-16  we  have 
a  most  important  account  of  popular  speculations  about 
the  person  of  Jesus :  the  people  have  many  opinions 
about  Him,  but  none  think  that  He  is  the  Messiah  ; 
to  St.  Matthew  such  speculations  are  of  little  interest, 
and  he  records  only  the  opinion  of  Herod.  In  St.  Mark 
the   demoniacs   are   invariably   silenced,   because   they 


14     OUTLINES  OF  THE  SYNOPTIC  RECORD 

salute  Jesus  as  Messiah.  The  significance  of  this,  how- 
ever, is  not  seen  in  St.  Matthew.  The  prohibition  of 
Mark  i.  34  ('and  He  suffered  not  the  devils  to  speak, 
because  they  knew  that  He  was  the  Messiah')  is 
omitted  by  St.  Matthew.  Again  in  Mark  hi.  11  we 
read,  *  and  the  unclean  spirits,  when  they  saw  Him,  kept 
falling  down  before  Him,  and  crying  out  "  Thou  art  the 
Son  of  God"  '  (i.e.  the  Messiah).  The  parallel  passage 
in  St.  Matthew  (xii.  15,  16)  has  only,  '  and  He  healed 
them  (the  sick  generally)  all,  and  rebuked  them  that  they 
should  not  make  Him  known '  :  i.  e.  he  gives  the  prohibi- 
tion, but  no  reason  for  it ;  nor  is  it  addressed  particu- 
larly to  demoniacs.  The  incident  of  the  Gerasene  de- 
moniac is  an  apparent  exception,  for  he  is  told  to  speak 
of  his  cure  (Mark  v.  19).  But  this  was  in  Decapolis, 
which  was  not  the  sphere  of  Jesus'  ministry  :  there  was 
not,  therefore,  the  same  danger  of  misunderstanding. 

The  disciples,  however  ready  they  may  have  been  at 
first  to  regard  their  Master  as  Messiah,  are  not  encour- 
aged to  do  so,  and  have  to  be  specially  trained  until 
they  have  discarded  some  of  the  popular  views  about 
the  Messiah's  function  and  work.  Only  at  the  end  of 
the  Galilean  ministry  is  the  confession  of  the  disciples, 
through  the  mouth  of  Peter,  invited  and  accepted :  and 
this  acceptance  is  not  based  merely  on  miracles :  in 
St.  Mark  (vi.  51,  52)  the  miracle  of  the  walking  on  the 
water  elicits  only  the  astonishment  of  the  disciples. 
In  the  parallel  passage  in  St.  Matthew  (xiv.  32,  33)  '  they 
worshipped  Him,  saying,  Truly  Thou  art  the  Son  of  God,' 
i.  e.  Messiah.  In  fact,  the  confession  of  Peter  is  com- 
paratively unimportant  in  the  Gospel  of  St.  Matthew, 
and  no  longer  marks  a  critical  point  in  the  history, 
because  the  disciples  have  already  confessed  that  Jesus 
is  the  Messiah. 


INTRODUCTION  15 

The  gradual  nature  of  the  opposition  and  hostility 
that  Jesus  had  to  encounter  is  seen  better  in  St.  Mark's 
Gospel  than  in  either  of  the  others.  An  arrangement 
of  the  contents  of  the  Gospel  is  often  based  by  commen- 
tators upon  this  feature  of  the  narrative :  that  this  is 
possible  shows  the  importance  and  prominence  assigned 
to  the  subject  by  St.  Mark.  No  such  arrangement 
could  be  made,  however,  of  St.  Matthew  or  St.  Luke, 
who,  although  they  retain  the  details  of  St.  Mark,  have 
obscured  his  outline. 

The  relative  claims  of  the  two  conflicting  theories 
have  now  been  tested  in  four  ways.  In  each  case 
the  theory  of  the  priority  of  St.  Mark  is  comparatively 
simple,  and  the  combination  theory  comparatively  com- 
plex. The  priority  of  St.  Mark  is  a  solution  of  difficul- 
ties which  are  only  multiplied  by  the  combination  theory. 
And,  since  each  line  of  argument  points  to  one  and  the 
same  conclusion,  their  collective  value  makes  that  con- 
clusion almost  irresistible.  The  establishment  of  the 
priority  of  St.  Mark  may  be  regarded  as  one  of  the 
most  certain  results  of  Gospel  criticism. 


APPENDIX  A. 

THE   ORAL  HYPOTHESIS. 

In  discussing  the  theory  of  the  priority  of  St.  Mark, 
the  assumption  was  made  for  the  sake  of  clearness  in 
argument,  that  to  prove  the  priority  of  St.  Mark  was 
the  same  thing  as  to  prove  that  our  written  Gospel  of 
St.  Mark,  in  its  present  form,  lay  before  St.  Matthew 
and  St.  Luke.  This  assumption  has  in  no  way  preju- 
diced the  argument.     At  present,  however,  all  that  has 


16     OUTLINES  OF  THE  SYNOPTIC  RECORD 

been  really  proved  is  that  the  '  first  source '  used  by 
St.  Matthew  and  St.  Luke,  both  in  contents,  order,  and 
arrangement,  bore  a  strong  resemblance  to  our  Gospel 
of  St.  Mark.  If  not  St.  Mark,  it  was  at  any  rate 
Marcan.  Two  questions,  therefore,  call  for  further 
examination ;  (1)  whether  the  first  source  was  a  written 
document  at  all,  and  (2)  whether,  if  written,  it  was  the 
Gospel  of  St.  Mark  in  its  present  form.  In  regard  to 
the  former  question,  the  theory  held  by  those  who  deny 
that  the  Evangelists  used  a  written  source  is  known  as 
the  Oral  Hypothesis.  Its  advocates  hold  that  the  first 
source,  though  approximating  in  character  and  contents 
to  our  written  Gospel  of  St.  Mark,  was  not  a  written 
document  at  all :  it  was  only  on  the  lips  of  men ;  their 
pens  had  not  yet  been  taken  up.  A  common  oral 
(i.  e.  unwritten)  tradition  was  the  groundwork  of  each 
of  the  three  Synoptic  Gospels.  The  main  line  of  tradi- 
tion, modified,  though  most  nearly  represented,  in  the 
Gospel  of  St.  Mark,  was  still  further  modified  in  two 
different  directions.  These  two  branches  of  the  main 
stem  are  represented  by  the  Gospels  of  St.  Matthew  and 
St.  Luke.  In  this  its  older  form  the  oral  theory  is 
particularly  vague  and  indefinite.  There  is  nothing 
to  correspond  to  the  distinction  between  passages  to 
be  referred  to  the  first  source,  and  passages  to  be 
referred  to  the  second  source :  one  oral  Gospel  is  postu- 
lated, modified,  as  explained  above,  in  three  ways.  In 
the  more  modern  presentation  of  the  theory  the  modi- 
fications of  the  original  oral  traditions  are  thought  to 
correspond  to  the  nature  of  those  sources  which  are 
postulated  by  adherents  of  the  documentary  hypothesis. 
Thus  it  is  held  that  there  were  two  main  lines  of  modifi- 
cation of  an  original  oral  Gospel  (the  first  and  second 
oral  sources).  Of  these  two  sources  the  first,  though 
unwritten,  was  Marcan  in  character.  It  is  clear,  there- 
fore, that  advocates  of  the  Oral  Hypothesis  can  at  the 
same  time  maintain  the  priority  of  St.  Mark.  In  ex- 
amining the  Oral  Hypothesis,  certain  questions  may  be 
propounded ; — 

(i)   What    evidence    is    there    for    an    original    oral 
Gospel  ? 


INTRODUCTION  17 

(ii)  What  are  the  advantages  of  the  Oral  Hypothesis 
as  opposed  to  the  hypothesis  of  written  sources  ? 
(iii)  What  are  its  disadvantages  ? 

(i.)  Evidence  for  an  Original  Oral  Gospel. 

The  supposition  that  the  Christian  Church  possessed 
written  Gospels  from  the  first  is  not  only  without  any 
support  from  external  evidence,  but  is  also  improbable 
in  itself.  The  apostles  were  Jews,  who  had  themselves 
been  orally  trained  in  Rabbinical  schools :  as  Galilean 
peasants  they  were  not  likely  to  have  any  special 
inclination  for  literary  efforts  :  their  duty  was  rather 
to  '  preach  the  Gospel '  than  to  write  Gospels :  the  Old 
Testament  Scriptures  were  a  textbook  ready  to  their 
hand :  when  they  did  write,  it  was  in  order  to  adapt 
their  message  to  the  needs  of  their  own  age,  rather  than 
with  any  conscious  presentiment  of  the  needs  of  genera- 
tions to  come. 

But,  as  apostles,  they  could  not  fail  to  give  a  pro- 
minent place  in  their  teaching  to  the  words  and  deeds 
of  Jesus.  Constant  intercourse  with  Him,  from  the 
baptism  of  John  to  the  Resurrection,  was  a  necessary 
qualification  for  the  apostolate.  It  appears  probable 
that  the  announcement  of  their  '  good  tidings '  was  often 
accompanied  by  a  brief  narrative  of  'the  facts  concern- 
ing Jesus.'  In  this  way  a  rough  framework  was  soon 
marked  out,  into  which  were  fitted  representative  facts 
and  teaching.  This  outline  began  with  the  baptism 
of  John,  and  ended  with  the  Ascension.  Special  pro- 
minence was  given  to  the  events  of  the  Passion  and 
Resurrection.  A  summary  of  this  early  oral  Gospel 
may  be  seen  in  Peter's  speech  before  Cornelius  (Acts  x. 
36-43).  Only  so  far  as  this  point  can  the  evolution 
of  the  Gospels  be  traced  with  certainty.  It  is  necessary 
to  turn  to  the  written  Gospels  themselves,  and  to  try  to 
ascertain  from  internal  evidence  what  lay  immediately 
behind  them.  It  is  true  that  the  limits  of  the  early 
oral  Gospel  were  practically  those  of  the  written  Gospel 
of  St.  Mark,  though  there  is  no  mention  of  the 
Ascension  in  St.  Mark's  Gospel.     But  it  by  no  means 


18     OUTLINES  OF  THE  SYNOPTIC  RECORD 

follows  that  it  was  in  substance  identical  with  our 
Second  Gospel.  Internal  evidence  points  to  two  sources, 
of  which  only  one  isMarcan.  The  explanation  of  the  agree- 
ments between  St.  Mark  and  St.  Matthew,  or  between 
St.  Mark  and  St.  Luke,  is  of  no  avail  as  regards  those 
further  agreements  between  St.  Luke  and  St.  Matthew 
which  are  not  shared  with  St.  Mark.  The  real  question 
at  issue,  therefore,  is  whether  these  two  sources  of  our 
Gospels  were  oral  or  written,  and  not  whether  there  ever 
was  an  oral  Gospel ;  and,  more  particularly,  as  regards 
the  first  source,  whether  there  existed  an  oral  source 
almost  identical  in  contents,  order,  and  phraseology 
with  the  written  Gospel  of  St.  Mark. 

(ii)    The  Advantages  of  the  Oral  Hypothesis. 

Let  it  be  granted  that  there  was  an  oral  Mark.  Two 
advantages  are  claimed  for  the  hypothesis  : — 

(a)  That  the  divergences  of  St.  Matthew  and  St.  Luke 
from  the  common  source  can  thus  be  more  easily  ex- 
plained. These  divergences  are  held  to  be  often  trivial, 
puerile,  and  meaningless,  and  therefore  to  be  due  to  the 
constant  '  attrition '  of  oral  tradition  rather  than  to  the 
mind  of  a  copyist.  But  it  must  be  remembered  that 
our  Evangelists  were  not  so  much  copyists  as  compilers, 
and  were  perfectly  at  liberty  to  vary  their  procedure 
without  giving  account  for  it ;  nor  did  they  necessarily 
regard  their  sources  with  reverence,  as  being  inspired, 
or  with  the  conscientious  feelings  of  the  modern  historian. 
Many  of  the  divergences  which  are  characterized  as 
trivial,  are  due  to  the  peculiar  style  of  the  Evangelists, 
and  will  be  found  to  fall  in  with  their  general  literary 
tendencies.  The  authors  themselves  would  probably 
have  been  unable  to  explain  many  deviations,  simply 
because  they  were  made  unconsciously.  Their  procedure 
need  not  have  been  uniform.  They  might  sometimes 
have  taken  their  eyes  from  the  source  and  have  trusted 
to  their  recollections  of  it,  or  to  notes  based  upon  it. 
Or  they  might  have  been  influenced  by  other  sources, 
both  oral  and  written  ;  for  the  theory  of  written  sources 
does  not  exclude  the  belief  that  oral  traditions  existed 


INTRODUCTION  19 

side  by  side  with  them.  An  Evangelist  may  therefore 
have  given  a  Marcan  saying  in  words  with  which  he 
was  familiar,  and  have  used  it  again,  under  the  influence 
of  another  source,  either  unconsciously  or  from  pre- 
ference. 

Again,  the  omission  of  many  of  St.  Mark's  proper 
names  is  said  to  be  due  to  the  didactic  aims  of  oral 
tradition,  and  to  a  desire  to  avoid  burdening  the 
memories  of  pupils,  'where  the  names  are  barbarous, 
and  the  persons  and  places  are  unknown.'  The  same 
explanations  are  applicable  to  written  documents,  if 
only  we  allow  them  a  didactic  tendency. 

(b)  According  to  the  oral  theory  no  loss  of  written 
documents  has  to  be  explained.  But,  as  far  as  the 
first  source  is  concerned,  we  practically  possess  such 
a  document  in  our  Second  Gospel.  Such  a  loss,  more- 
over, is  explicable  when  once  the  source  has  been 
embodied  in  other  documents,  and  thus  superseded  for 
purposes  of  information. 

(iii)    The  Disadvantages  of  the  Oral  Hypothesis. 

When  the  resemblances  of  the  Synoptists  have  to  be 
explained  it  is  found  necessary  to  attribute  a  very 
definite  character  to  the  oral  first  source.  The  order 
and  phraseology  of  the  traditions  must  have  been  faith- 
fully preserved  in  the  memories  of  men.  The  very  close 
agreement  of  the  written  Gospels,  which  extends  even 
to  particles  and  turns  of  speech,  can  only  have  been 
produced  by  attributing  very  great  authority  to  the 
oral  traditions,  so  that  no  particle  was  consciously 
allowed  to  fall  to  the  ground.  Some  alterations,  no 
doubt,  there  were,  but  these  were  unconsciously  made, 
and  not  due  to  literary  motives. 

Such  a  feat  of  memory  would  have  been  a  great  one. 
Analogies  are  brought  forward  even  from  India  and 
China  to  counterbalance  this  objection.  While  such 
faithful  transmission  may  have  been  possible,  it  remains 
improbable,  in  view  of  the  unlettered  condition  and  wide 
.diffusion  of  the  early  Christians. 

To   obtain  the  requisite  degree   of  fixation  of  oral 

C2 


20     OUTLINES  OF  THE  SYNOPTIC  RECORD 

traditions,  some  definite  organization  must  be  postu- 
lated. This  want  has  been  met  by  a  recent  theory, 
which  attributes  the  shaping  of  the  oral  Gospel  to 
catechists  or  oral  teachers — a  body  of  men  who  are 
held  to  have  devoted  themselves  to  this  kind  of  work. 
That  teaching  was  a  function  in  the  early  Christian 
communities  is  indisputable ;  but  there  seems  to  be  no 
evidence  in  the  New  Testament  to  prove  that  a  separate 
organization  of  teachers  existed.  The  attempts  to  ex- 
plain the  various  lines  in  which  oral  traditions  were 
modified  contain  a  large  element  of  historical  imagina- 
tion. It  is  held  that  when  our  Gospels  differ  from  their 
common  source  it  is  because  they  embody  an  ora] 
modification  of  that  source,  and  not  because  the  Evange- 


Origina.1 
Oral  Gospel. 


Second  Oral  Source. 


Oral 
L  uca.n 
Second  Source. 


Oral 

Matthafan 
Second  Source . 


The  above  diagram  is  an  attempt  to  represent  the  views 
of  the   Rev.    A.   Wright   on   the   origin   of  our   written 

Gospels. 


INTRODUCTION  21 

lists  themselves  made  the  alterations.  It  is  further 
held  that  the  nature  of  the  differences  between  the 
Synoptists  points  to  some  such  cause.  But  when  the 
modifications  of  the  oral  Gospel  have  been  thus  sub- 
modified,  the  oral  theory  itself  becomes  improbable, 
just  because  it  becomes  so  complicated. 

These  objections  to  the  oral  theory  seem  to  outweigh 
any  advantages  which  it  possesses.  They  are  not  objec- 
tions to  the  opinion  that  written  Gospels  rest  ultimately 
upon  oral  tradition,  but  only  to  the  theory  that  our 
written  Gospels  are  directly  dependent  on  it.  Considera- 
tion of  the  Oral  Hypothesis  has  been,  so  far,  confined 
to  the  first  source.  The  theory  will  call  for  further 
notice  when  the  character  of  the  second  source  is 
discussed. 


APPENDIX  B. 
ST.  MARK  AND  THE  FIRST  SOURCE. 

Granting  that  the  first  source  was  a  written  document, 
it  was  not  necessarily  identical  with  our  Gospel  of 
St.  Mark.  In  the  past  there  has  been  considerable 
diversity  of  opinion  on  this  point  among  the  advocates 
of  the  priority  of  St.  Mark.  Critics  have  upheld  the 
idea  of  an  original  Mark  or  a  source  that  was  used 
by  the  author  of  our  Second  Gospel,  as  well  as  by 
St.  Matthew  and  St.  Luke.  The  discussion  falls  under 
two  heads : — 

(i)  The  original  Mark  may  have  exceeded  our  Gospel 
in  size.  This  implies  that  St.  Mark  omitted  passages 
from  his  source.  That  he  omitted  sections  so  important 
as  the  Sermon  on  the  Mount  is  a  view  that  has  now 
been  abandoned  by  its  chief  advocate.  There  are, 
however,  several  small  agreements  between  St.  Matthew 
and  St.  Luke  as  against  St.  Mark  contained  in  sections 
which  must  have  come  from  the  first  source. 


22     OUTLINES  OF  THE  SYNOPTIC  RECORD 

In  the  healing  of  the  paralytic  we  have  some  examples 
of  this  : — 

Matt.  ix.  Mark  ii.  Luke  v. 

ver.  ver.  ver. 

(a)  2.  not  ISov  ...  3.  Kai  .  . ,  18.  ml  ISov 

(&)   2.  Itti  KXivrjS .  .  3.  omits.  18.  km  kXivtjs. 

4.  Kpa&OLTTOV. 

(c)  eftf-fi/  .  .  5.  Xkyei.  20.  e?7rei/. 

(d)  4.  .  .  rets  h6vfi7]<7€is     8.  . .  6Vt  oura;?  SiaXoyi-    22.  .  .  tovs  diaXoytCfiovs 

avruiv-,  dtrev  . .  ^o^Tat    kv   kavroTs,  gyra/v,  einey  . . 

\eyei .  . 

(e)  5.  tyeipe.  9.  Zyeipov.  23.  Zyupe. 

(/)  6.  tj)j/  K\ivr)v  .  .  11.  tw  Kpa(5a.TT0V  .  .  24.  to  kAlvISlov  .  . 

(gr)   7.  dnfjAOev   eh   t&v  k£fj\6(v     efjnrpoaOev  25.  a7r^A.^€i/  ct?  Toy  oftfof 

oikov  avrov.  iravrcov  .  .  .  avrov. 

(h)  8.  k(po0T)d7}aav.  12.  k^iaraaOai . .  26.  ..eKOTaais...<p6Pov.. 

According  to  the  theory  above  mentioned  all  the 
underlined  words  were  in  the  original  Mark,  and 
were  omitted  or  altered  in  our  Mark.  On  the  other 
hand,  those  who  reject  this  theory  hold  that  our 
Mark  lay  before  St.  Matthew  and  St.  Luke,  and  that 
these  peculiar  phenomena  are  to  be  explained  in  one 
of  two  ways  : — (a)  They  are  due  to  a  knowledge  and  slight 
use  of  St.  Matthew  by  St.  Luke :  in  many  cases,  how- 
ever, this  theory  creates  new  difficulties,  since  the 
deviations  of  St.  Luke  from  St.  Matthew  (e.g.  in  chapters 
i  and  ii)  imply  ignorance  of  that  Gospel :  (b)  They  are 
regarded  as  trivial  and  unimportant;  many  may  be 
coincidences,  e.g.  a,  e,  and  h,  especially  when  there  is 
a  simplification  of  Marcan  style,  e.g.  b,  c,  d,  and  /. 
Others  may  be  due  to  the  imperfections  of  our  present 
text :  later  copyists  show  a  tendency  to  assimilate 
passages  in  one  Gospel  to  parallel  passages  in  another. 
It  is  therefore  possible  that,  owing  to  similar  procedure 
on  the  part  of  earlier  copyists,  we  have  traces  in  the 
strange  agreements  between  St.  Matthew  and  St.  Luke 
of  early  mistakes  in  the  text.  The  common  differences 
from  St.  Mark  that  remain  are  not  sufficient  to  necessi- 
tate a  theory  of  a  source  that  is  to  any  appreciable 
extent  larger  than  our  Second  Gospel ;  they  are  rather 


INTRODUCTION  23 

such  as  are  found  between  one  manuscript  and  another, 
or,  at  most,  between  one  edition  and  another. 

(ii)  The  original  Mark  may  be  said  to  have  been 
smaller  than  our  Gospel.  Even  if  St.  Mark  omitted 
nothing,  he  may  have  added  something.  But  it  will 
be  found  that,  when  we  come  to  collect  the  matter 
that  is  peculiar  to  St.  Mark,  there  is  very  little  of  it. 
According  to  Mr.  Wright,  the  third  edition  of  St.  Mark 
(i.e.  our  Gospel)  contains  four  new  sections,  which  are 
the  latest  additions. 

(a)  Mark  iii.  20-21.  The  suspicion  that  Jesus  was 
mad. 

(b)  Mark  iv.  26-29.  The  Parable  of  the  Seed  growing 
secretly.  St.  Matthew,  however,  has  been  thought,  not 
unreasonably,  to  show  knowledge  of  this  section. 

(c)  Mark  vii.  31-37.     The  healing  of  a  deaf  man. 

(d)  Mark  viii.  22-26.  The  healing  of  the  blind  man 
at  Bethsaida. 

In  the  two  latter  instances  only  St.  Matthew  is 
parallel  to  St.  Mark  :  owing  to  his  habit  of  abbreviation, 
it  is  quite  possible  to  hold  that  the  sections  lay  before 
him,  and  some  think  that  traces  of  them  are  to  be 
found  in  his  Gospel.  There  are  other  and  smaller 
additions,  especially  the  incident  of  the  young  man 
who  followed  Jesus  at  the  time  of  the  arrest  (Mark  xiv. 
51).  If  a  clear  difference  of  style  between  these  passages 
and  the  rest  of  the  Gospel  could  be  proved,  we  might 
assign  the  addition  to  a  later  author.  We  believe, 
however,  that  such  proof  is  not  forthcoming.  It  would 
be  strange  if  St.  Matthew  and  St.  Luke,  while  they 
have  individually  omitted  much  from  St.  Mark,  should 
never  have  coincided  in  such  omission,  or  have  been 
influenced  by  the  same  literary  motives  \ 

1  Further  arguments  in  support  of  this  view  will  be  found  in 
The  Study  of  the  Gospels,  by  the  Dean  of  Westminster. 


24     OUTLINES  OF  THE  SYNOPTIC  RECORD 

III.     THE   SECOND  SOURCE. 

A.  Existence  and  Character. 

In  the  Gospels  of  St.  Matthew  and  St.  Luke  there 
are  still  left  many  passages  which  are  not  derived  from 
St.  Mark,  but  show  similar  phenomena  of  agreement 
one  with  the  other.  These  are  to  be  referred  to  a  second 
source,  which  we  no  longer  possess.  Sometimes  we  find 
that  St.  Matthew  and  St.  Luke  have  repeated  a  saying 
of  Jesus,  which  has  already  been  given  in  a  Marcan 
context ;  but  both  agree  in  repeating  it  in  a  new  con- 
nexion and  in  a  new  form.  Such  duplicate  passages  are 
usually  called  '  doublets';  e.g.  Matt.  xvi.24=Luke  ix.  23, 
because  each  is  following  Mark  viii.  34.  But  another 
form  of  the  same  saying  is  preserved  in  Matt.  x.  38  = 
Luke  xiv.  27,  and  in  a  different  connexion,  for  Matt. 
x.  37  =  Luke  xiv.  26,  i.  e.  both  are  preceded  by  the  same 
context.  We  have  therefore  in  St.  Matthew  and  St.  Luke 
a  saying  of  Jesus  preserved  in  two  forms :  in  the  first 
they  follow  St.  Mark  (the  first  source),  in  the  second  a 
context  which  is  known  to  both,  but  not  Marcan.  This 
context  is  that  of  the  second  source. 

If  we  collect  the  non-Marcan  passages  common  to 
St.  Matthew  and  St.  Luke,  we  shall  find  that  they 
consist  chiefly  of  speeches  and  aphorisms,  such  as  the 
Sermon  on  the  Mount,  certain  parables,  a  discourse 
directed  against  the  Pharisees,  and  some  discourses 
that  deal  with  the  future.  Therefore  the  name  *  Logia,' 
derived  from  the  Adyta  KvptaKa  ('  utterances  of  the  Lord ') 
of  Papias,  is  generally  assigned  by  critics  to  the  second 
source.  We  need  not  suppose,  however,  that  it  con- 
tained no  historical  matter  at  all.  That  many  speeches 
had  an  explanatory  introduction  is  very  probable.     But 


INTRODUCTION  25 

in  other  cases  no  such  introduction  remained,  and  the 
utterance  was  abruptly  introduced ;  e.  g.  the  woes 
uttered  against  Chorazin  and  Bethsaida  in  Matt.  xi. 
20-23  (  =  Luke  x.  13-15)  are  a  fragment  in  themselves, 
and  the  short  introduction  of  Matt.  xi.  20  gives  us  no 
information  as  to  the  occasion  or  the  circumstances  in 
which  these  words  were  uttered.  In  the  account  of  the 
message  sent  by  John  the  Baptist  to  Jesus  from  his 
prison  we  have  a  fuller  introduction  (Matt.  xi.  2-19  = 
Luke  vii.  18-35).  In  Matt.  viii.  5-13  (  =  Luke  vii.  2-10) 
we  actually  have  a  miracle;  though,  even  here,  the 
kernel  of  the  narrative  lies  in  the  utterance  of  Jesus. 
The  Logia,  therefore,  was  evidently  not  so  much  a 
history  of  the  facts  concerning  Jesus  as  a  collection 
of  His  utterances.  The  connexion  between  these  was 
often  loose,  and,  when  it  existed,  was  based  rather  on 
subject-matter  than  on  chronology.  It  contained  at  the 
same  time  some  incidents,  which  served  to  enshrine 
certain  notable  utterances,  or  introductions  to  explain 
and  give  point  to  them. 

While  we  are  probably  right  in  referring  to  the  Logia  all 
the  non-Marcan  matter  that  is  common  to  St.  Matthew 
and  St.  Luke,  it  may  also  have  contained  some  matter 
that  is  peculiar  to  the  one,  and  has  been  omitted  by  the 
other.  The  determination  of  its  contents  is  the  harder 
because  we  have  only  two  documents  to  represent  it, 
whereas,  in  order  to  determine  the  nature  of  the  first 
source,  we  have  St.  Mark  in  addition  to  St.  Matthew 
and  St.  Luke. 

The  order  is  similarly  more  difficult  to  restore.  The 
Evangelists  would  be  far  more  likely  to  deviate  from 
a  source  of  this  character  than  from  such  a  source  as 
St.  Mark.  There  are,  however,  places  in  which  the 
original  order  can  still  be  traced : — 


26     OUTLINES  OF  THE  SYNOPTIC  RECORD 

Matthew.  Luke. 

(i)  ix.  36 — xi.  1.    Sending  out  of  =    (i)    x.  1-12.     Sending   out  of 
disciples  and  charge  (with  disciples  and  charge, 

other  matter), 
[xi.  2-19.    St.  John's  message.]  St.  Luke  omits  here,  having 

inserted  it  previously, 
(ii)  xi.  20-24.      Woes       against   =  (ii)  x.   13-16.     Woes     against 
Galilean  cities.  Galilean  cities. 

[x.  17-20.  Eeturn  of  disciples 
(peculiar  to  St.  Luke).] 
(iii)  xi.  25-30.  'Hymn  of  praise.'   =  (iii)  x.  21-24. 'Hymn  of  praise.' 

The  phenomena  of  phraseology  present  similar  diffi- 
culties. While,  in  places,  the  agreement  is  very  close 
(e.g.  Matt.  xi.  25-30= Luke  x.  21-24)  the  differences 
are  hard  to  explain.  This  may  be  due  partly  to  the 
fact  that  we  have  no  document  to  represent  the  source, 
as  in  the  case  of  St.  Mark.  If  we  had  the  Logia  before 
us,  we  should  probably  find  phrases  which  would  explain 
divergences  in  either  direction.  In  the  case  of  the  first 
source,  many  of  the  differences  between  St.  Matthew 
and  St.  Luke  would  be  difficult  to  explain  but  for  the 
Marcan  key  which  fits  the  lock.  The  influence  of  oral 
tradition  must  also  be  taken  into  account.  The  frag- 
mentary or  topical  nature  of  the  connexion  renders  a 
theory  of  gradual  oral  composition  far  more  probable 
than  was  the  case  with  the  Marcan  source.  The  period 
therefore  before  the  traditions  were  committed  to 
writing  was  probably  longer  in  this  case  than  in  the 
former.  But  that  there  were  written  editions  of  the 
1  Logia '  (one  or  more)  before  the  composition  of 
St.  Matthew  and  St.  Luke  is  rendered  probable  by  the 
close  agreement  that  remains  in  many  passages.  Yet 
these  writings  would  not  have  superseded  the  oral 
traditions,  which  would  still  have  retained  a  great  hold 


INTRODUCTION  27 

over  the  minds  of  men.  This  may  have  given  rise  to 
several  written  editions  of  the  '  Logia,'  one  of  which 
may  have  fallen  into  the  hands  of  St.  Matthew,  and 
one  into  the  hands  of  St.  Luke.  Or,  while  using  the 
same  edition,  each  may  have  given  special  weight  to 
the  oral  traditions,  with  which  he  was  familiar.  We 
know  that  some  utterances  of  Jesus  were  orally  pre- 
served, which  yet  never  found  their  way  into  our 
Gospels ;  e.  g.  *  It  is  blessed  rather  to  give  than  to  receive ' 
(Acts  xx.  35),  and  'Be  ye  good  money-changers' — 
a  saying  that  may  well  be  genuine,  though  not  found  in 
the  New  Testament. 

B.   Relation  of  St.  Matthew  and  St.  Luke  to  the  Logia. 

It  is  difficult  to  say  which  of  the  two  is  nearer  to  the 
common  source  or  more  original.  In  phraseology, 
judging  by  their  treatment  of  the  first  source,  we  should 
not  expect  exclusive  originality  on  either  side.  We  can 
only  conjecture  therefore  in  particular  places  which 
form  of  expression  is  the  more  original,  the  Matthaean 
or  the  Lucan.  As  regards  order  and  arrangement  certain 
broad  facts  are  clear : — 

(i)  St.  Luke  puts  a  great  deal  of  the  matter  derived 
from  the  Logia  into  one  part  of  his  Gospel  (ix.  51 — xviii. 
14)  which  contains  no  Marcan  matter.  This  '  great 
Insertion '  contains  many  incidents  and  discourses  taken 
from  non -Marcan  sources,  and  particularly  from  the 
Logia,  which  are  not  to  be  referred  to  any  one  period 
of  the  ministry,  as  though  St.  Luke  had  put  them 
together  in  this  place  for  chronological  reasons. 

(ii)  St.  Luke  often  gives  introductions  to  isolated 
passages,  which  are  in  St.  Matthew  combined  with 
other  matter :    e.  g.  the  Lord's  Prayer  in  St.  Luke  is 


28     OUTLINES  OF  THE  SYNOPTIC  RECORD 

prefaced  by  the  request  of  the  disciples,  '  Lord,  teach  us 
to  pray.'  In  St.  Matthew  it  forms  part  of  the  Sermon 
on  the  Mount. 

(iii)  St.  Matthew  has  a  tendency  to  combine  one 
discourse  with  another.  In  this  way  most  of  the  matter 
taken  from  the  Logia  is  introduced  into  the  Marcan 
framework  at  suitable  points,  and  is  often  combined 
with,  or  appended  to,  a  Marcan  discourse :  e.  g.  the 
charge  to  the  disciples  in  St.  Matthew  is  a  conflation  of 
the  charge  to  the  Twelve  in  St.  Mark  and  the  charge  to  the 
Seventy  in  St.  Luke.  Again,  much  matter  is  grouped 
together  in  the  Sermon  on  the  Mount :  if  St.  Matthew 
combined  discourses  of  the  Logia  with  those  of  St.  Mark, 
it  is  possible  that  he  also  combines  discourses  from  the 
Logia  with  each  other.  The  alternative  is  to  suppose 
that  St.  Luke  broke  up  the  whole  into  fragments, 
appending  at  times  short  introductions  of  his  own. 

The  new  light  thrown  by  these  facts  upon  the 
Synoptic  Gospels  should  be  of  great  service  to  the 
historical  student.  The  results  may  now  be  briefly  re- 
capitulated : — 

(i)  All  passages  in  St.  Matthew  and  St.  Luke  that  are 
also  in  St.  Mark  come  from  the  first  source,  which  is 
probably  identical  with  our  Second  Gospel. 

(ii)  All  other  passages  common  to  St.  Matthew  and 
St.  Luke  are  to  be  referred  to  the  second  source  (Logia), 
or  collection  of  the  utterances  of  Jesus. 

(iii)  Passages  peculiar  to  St.  Matthew  or  St.  Luke 
cannot,  as  yet,  be  referred  with  certainty  to  any  source. 
Some  may  come  from  the  Logia,  and  some  from  un- 
known sources,  written  or  oral. 


INTRODUCTION  29 

APPENDIX  C. 
ST.  MARK  AND  THE  LOGIA. 

An  account  of  the  Synoptic  Problem  would  not  bo 
complete  without  mention  of  the  theory  of  Dr.  Weiss, 
not  so  much  because  of  any  considerable  adherence 
given  to  it,  as  because  of  the  eminence  of  its  chief 
advocate.  The  theory  is  supported  in  England  by 
Mr.  Jolley  in  his  Synoptic  Problem  for  English  Readers. 

It  is  thought  that  St.  Mark,  our  first  source,  knew  and 
used  the  Logia.  According  to  Dr.  Weiss,  however,  the 
Logia,  which  he  calls  the  apostolic  source,  contained 
a  great  deal  more  historical  matter  than  other  critics 
believe  to  be  the  case.  This  additional  historical  matter 
is  found  in  St.  Mark,  and  in  the  parallel  passages  in 
St.  Matthew  and  St.  Luke.  In  such  passages  St.  Matthew 
is  held  to  present  a  type  of  narrative  that  is  more 
original  than  St.  Mark's,  and  therefore  due  to  the 
influence  of  the  Logia.  In  these  sections  any  agree- 
ments between  St.  Matthew  and  St.  Luke  which  are 
not  shared  by  St.  Mark,  are  also  held  to  be  due  to 
the  influence  of  the  Logia. 

An  example  is  the  healing  of  the  leper,  contained  in 
Mark  i.  40-45  (=Matt.  viii.  l-4=Luke  v.  12-16).  Here 
there  is  only  one  agreement  between  St.  Matthew  and 
St.  Luke  that  is  not  shared  by  St.  Mark, — the  word 
Kvpie,  addressed  by  the  leper  to  Jesus.  In  St.  Matthew 
the  narrative,  it  is  true,  is  shorter  than  in  St.  Mark. 
If,  however,  we  admit  that  abbreviation  is  as  character- 
istically Matthaean  as  '  duality  '  is  Marcan,  abbreviation 
does  not  in  itself  imply  originality.  The  presence  of 
the  crowds  at  the  time  of  the  miracle  is  a  feature 
peculiar  to  St.  Matthew  :  the  point  of  Jesus'  injunctions 
to  secrecy  is  lost  if  the  miracle  was  performed  in  public, 
and  this  makes  for  the  originality  of  the  Marcan  rather 
than  of  the  Matthaean  version  of  the  incident. 

While  in  this  and  similar  passages  Dr.  Weiss's  argu- 
ments for  the  originality  of  St.  Matthew,  due  to  the  in- 


30     OUTLINES  OF  THE  SYNOPTIC  RECORD 

fluence  of  the  Logia,  seem  arbitrary,  and  are  not  in  them- 
selves convincing,  it  is  still  difficult,  even  if  we  admit 
them,  to  understand  on  what  principles  St.  Mark  made 
his  selection  from  the  Logia,  and  why  he  omitted  so  much 
that  we  know  was  contained  in  it.  Chiefly  for  this 
reason  it  is  probable  that  the  Logia  was  not  one  of 
St.  Mark's  sources.  Occasionally  no  doubt  the  first  source 
and  the  Logia  contained  similar  matter,  e.g.  in  the 
charge  delivered  to  the  disciples.  But  any  agreements 
that  there  are  between  them  need  not  be  referred  to 
any  literary  connexion,  but  may  be  explained  by  the 
influence  of  oral  tradition ;  so  that,  if  in  St.  Mark  there 
are  traces  of  the  Logia,  such  knowledge  came  to  him 
through  his  own  memory  or  that  of  others. 


APPENDIX  D. 
ST.  LUKE'S   PREFACE   (I.  1-4). 

In  this  preface  to  his  Gospel  St.  Luke  sets  forth  the 
principles  and  aims  that  had  guided  him  in  its  composi- 
tion. Any  theory  relating  to  the  sources  employed  by 
St.  Luke  must  therefore  be  at  once  abandoned  if  found  to 
contradict  these  statements  which  are  made  by  St.  Luke 
himself. 

(i)  'E7T£t8^7r€p  ttoWoL  i-n-ex^Lprjcray  avaTa£a(r6cu  &Lrjyr)(riv  Trepl 
ruiv  TT€7rXr]pocf>opr]ix€V(ji)V  iv  tj/xlv  TTpaypiaTQiv,  (ii)  Ka6<bs  -rrapihocrav 

7]pUV    Ot    6.TT     O-PXyS    CLVTOTTTCLL    KOU    V7T7)peTCU    y€VOp.€VOL   TOV    XojOV, 

(hi)  e&o£e  Kap.o\  (a)  TraprjKoXovOrjKOTt  avoiOcv  7racriv  (b)  d/c/oi- 
yScos  (c)  Ka^€^7?  ctol  ypa\f/ai,  Kpano-Tt  ®co<£<Ae,  (iv)  Iva  C7rtyva)s 
Trcpl  wv  Karr]x>]0r]<;  Xoyiav  rrjv  dcr^aXeiav. 

(i)  The  words  €7raS^7rep  .  .  .  TrpaypLaruv  state  that  more 
than  one  account  of  the  events  of  the  life  of  Jesus  was 
in  existence  before  the  Gospel  of  St.  Luke.  That  such 
accounts  were  written,  and  not  oral,  is  implied,  but  not 
proved,  by  the  parallelism  that  St.  Luke  draws  between 
his  undertaking  and  those  that  preceded  it,  and  also 

by  the  words  avard^aaOac  Striyrjcnv. 


INTRODUCTION  31 

(ii)  /ca0ws  .  .  .  tov  \6yov  implies  that  these  narratives 
were  based  on  the  testimony  of  eyewitnesses  and  of 
those  who  had  themselves  played  their  part  in  the 
ministry  of  the  Gospel.  The  statement  is  exactly  ap- 
plicable to  our  Gospel  of  St.  Mark,  if  we  accept  the 
early  tradition  that  St.  Mark  embodied  in  his  Gospel 
the  reminiscences  of  Peter. 

(iii)  eSo£e  Ka/jLoL  St.  Luke  proceeds  to  justify  his  new 
undertaking  by  the  following  considerations  : — (a)  Traprj- 
koXovOtjkotl  avwOiv  irao-iv — by  its  completeness.  Much 
more  information  is  contained  in  St.  Luke  than  in 
St.  Mark.  He  begins  his  narrative  at  an  earlier  point 
than  the  preaching  of  John  the  Baptist,  and  has  added 
a  great  deal  to  the  account  of  the  ministry,  (b)  d/cpi/3oos 
— by  care  in  his  investigations,  (c)  KaOegqs  o-ol  ypdij/ai .  .  . 
by  an  orderly  arrangement.  It  is  not  implied,  however, 
that  such  an  arrangement  is  based  on  chronology. 

(iv)  He  proceeds  to  state  the  object  of  his  Gospel,  to 
confirm  Theophilus  in  the  knowledge  that  he  had  gained 
from  oral  teaching.  Such  knowledge  would  not  neces- 
sarily be  confined  to  historical  facts.  We  may,  therefore, 
conclude  that  in  these  words  St.  Luke  professes  a  didactic 
aim  for  his  Gospel, — a  Gospel  not  written  for  Theophilus 
alone.  He  intends  it  to  be  a  supplement  to  existing 
oral  teaching.  He  has  implied,  however,  the  existence 
of  written  documents  also.  Whether  he  used  these  or 
not  he  does  not  actually  say,  but  from  the  explicit 
manner  in  which  he  asserts  the  completeness  and 
thoroughness  of  his  investigations  we  should  naturally 
infer  that  he  availed  himself  of  them. 


APPENDIX  E. 

PAPIAS  AND  THE  SYNOPTISTS. 

Though  we  have  no  further  direct  testimony  from 
the  New  Testament  about  the  composition  of  the 
Synoptic  Gospels,  the  statements  of  Papias,  Bishop  of 
Hierapolis,  in  the  earlier  part  of   the   second  century 


32     OUTLINES  OF  THE  SYNOPTIC  RECORD 

(c.  a.d.  130  to  140),  must  be  taken  into  account.  Two 
fragments  are  related  to  the  question  before  us  : — 

(i)  'And  the  elder  said  this  also:  Mark  having 
become  the  interpreter  of  Peter  wrote  down  accu- 
rately everything  that  he  remembered,  without,  how- 
ever, recording  in  order  what  was  either  said  or  done 
by  Christ.  For  neither  did  he  hear  the  Lord,  nor  did 
he  follow  Him,  but  afterwards,  as  I  said,  [attended] 
Peter,  who  adapted  his  instruction  to  the  needs  [of 
his  hearers],  but  had  no  design  of  giving  a  connected 
account  of  the  Lord's  oracles  {KvpiaKwv  AoyiW).  So  then 
Mark  made  no  mistake,  while  he  thus  wrote  down 
some  things  as  he  remembered  them;  for  he  made  it 
his  own  care  not  to  omit  anything  that  he  heard,  or  to 
set  down  any  false  statement  therein.' 

(ii)  'So  then  Matthew  composed  the  oracles  (A.6yia) 
in  the  Hebrew  language,  and  each  one  interpreted  them 
as  he  could1.' 

The  external  evidence  before  us  is  not  so  important 
as  that  of  St.  Luke.  It  is  quite  possible  that  Papias  was 
ignorant  of  some  facts,  or  made  some  mistakes.  This, 
however,  should  not  be  lightly  assumed,  and  a  theory 
which  is  supported  by  this  external  testimony  will  have 
greater  a  priori  probability  than  one  which  is  at 
variance  with  it. 

The  first  fragment  evidently  refers  to  our  Gospel  of 
St.  Mark,  and  states  (a)  that  it  was  founded  on  the 
teaching  of  Peter,  (b)  that  it  was  not  drawn  up  in 
order,  and  (c)  that  the  reminiscences  of  Peter  were 
embodied  in  the  Gospel  with  great  care.  We  have 
already  spoken  of  the  Petrine  character  of  the  Second 
Gospel.  Papias  may  be  comparing  the  order  of  St.  Mark 
with  that  of  some  other  Gospel  known  to  him,  e.  g. 
St.  Matthew  or  St.  John.  Or  he  may  refer  simply  to 
an  order  based  on  chronology :  it  has  been  pointed  out 
that  St.  Mark's  arrangement  of  certain  incidents  is  not 
chronological.  The  care  bestowed  by  St.  Mark  on  his 
Gospel  is  consistent  with  the  peculiar  features  of  his 
style. 

1  The  translation  is  that  of  Bishop  Lightfoot. 


INTRODUCTION  33 

In  the  second  fragment  Papias  is  probably  referring 
to  theLogia  rather  than  to  our  First  Gospel.  The  latter 
is  a  composite  work,  based  to  a  great  extent  on  the 
Logia,  which  may  well  have  been  written  by  St.  Mat- 
thew. While,  therefore,  the  Gospel  is  not  the  work  of 
an  apostle,  it  probably  had  a  Matthaean  source,  and 
hence  derived  its  title  and  authority  in  the  early  Church. 
It  is  improbable  that  the  First  Gospel  is  a  direct  trans- 
lation from  Hebrew,  or  from  Palestinian  Aramaic.  That 
such  a  version,  nearly  approaching  it,  existed  we  have 
considerable  evidence.  This  'Hebrew'  Matthew  may 
have  been  merely  derived  from  a  translation  of  the 
Greek  Gospel,  or  of  the  Greek  Logia.  There  would 
then  have  been  some  confusion  in  Papias'  statement, 
if  he  had  been  alluding  to  it  here.  Or  there  may  have 
been  a  Hebrew  original  of  the  Logia,  of  which  the 
Greek  was  a  translation.  The  evidence  of  Papias  is, 
however,  vague  in  itself,  and  need  throw  no  doubt  upon 
the  existence  of  a  Greek  Logia. 


CHAPTEE    I 

THE  INFANCY  AND  CHILDHOOD 

The  Infancy  Narratives. — Promise  of  the  Birth  of  the  Baptist. — 
Promise  of  the  Birth  of  Jesus.  —  Birth  of  the  Baptist. — 
Birth  of  Jesus. — Circumcision  and  Presentation  in  the 
Temple.— Coming  of  the  Magi  and  Flight  into  Egypt. — 
Residence  at  Nazareth.— Incident  of  the  Childhood. 

Matthew  i.  18-25,  ii.    Luke  i,  ii. 

The  Two        The  earliest  Apostolic  tradition  dealt  only  with  the 
oTthatlVeS  Pu^^c  ministry  of  Jesus,  and  so  opened  with  the  preach- 
Infancy.     ing  of   John  the  Baptist.     Its  scope  corresponded,  in 
the  main,  with  that  of  St.  Mark's  Gospel,  and  therefore 
contained  no    account  of   the  Nativity   and   Infancy. 
Of  these,  however,  two  narratives  have  been  preserved 
to  us,  by  our  first  and  third  Evangelists.     These  two 
records   are   clearly    independent,   and  it    seems   best, 
therefore,  to  treat  them  separately  without  making  any 
attempt  to  form  them  into  a  continuous  narrative. 
St.  Luke's      St.  Luke,  whose  account  appears  to  be  fuller   and 
Luke?  1-4  more  complete,  may  be  referring  to  his  history  of  the 
infancy  and  childhood  of  Jesus  and  the  Baptist,  when 
he  states  in  his  prologue  that  he  had  derived   his  in- 
formation from  those  'which  from  the  beginning  were 
eyewitnesses  (ol  air'  apxys  auT07nrai),'  and  that  he  himself 
had  '  traced  the  course  of  all  things  accurately  from  the 

first  (avwOev).' 


THE  INFANCY  AND  CHILDHOOD  35 

Immediately  after  the  prologue  his  Gospel  opens  with  Promise  of 
the  announcement  of  the  birth  of  the  Baptist,  the  fore-  JJt^ irth 
runner   of   the   Messiah.     His   parents,   Zacharias   and  Baptist. 
Elisabeth,  were  both  of  priestly  descent,  and  are  de-  ^ ke  u  5~ 
scribed  as  Jews  of  strict  and  scrupulous  piety  of  life. 
They    were,   however,   as   yet    childless,    though    both 
advanced  in  years.     While  Zacharias,  in   the  turn  of 
his  course  to  perform  the  priestly  office,  was  offering 
incense  in  the  temple,  the  angel  Gabriel  appeared  to 
him  and  announced  that  he  should  have  a  son.     This 
son,  he  declared,  should  be  a  Nazirite  from  his  birth, 
and  should  carry  out  the  work  of  the  messenger,  fore- 
told by  the   prophet   Malachi,  by  preparing   the  way  cf. 
of  Jehovah.     Zacharias,  on  showing  incredulity  at  the  Mal-  1V-  1- 
announcement,  was  struck  dumb  in  sign  of  its  fulfilment. 
St.  Luke  certainly  represents  this  to  mean  a  physical 
loss  of  speech.     It  has,  however,  been  suggested  that  it 
should  rather  be  understood  as  referring  to  the  incredu- 
lity of  Zacharias,  which  caused  him  to  keep  secret  the 
angelic  promise. 

Five  months  after  the  announcement  of  the  birth  of  Promise  of 
the  forerunner  came  that  of  the  birth  of  Jesus.     Thus  the  Birth 

or  Jesus. 
St.  Luke   impresses   upon  us  how  the   lives   of  Jesus  Luke  i. 

and  the  Baptist  are  interwoven  from  the  first.  The  26~38- 
angel  Gabriel  appeared  to  Mary,  a  virgin  of  Naza- 
reth, who  was  espoused  to  Joseph,  a  man  of  the  house 
of  David,  and  foretold  that  she  should  bear  a  Son, 
who  should  be  called  Jesus.  The  prediction  went  on 
to  declare,  'He  shall  be  great,  and  shall  be  called  the 
Son  of  the  Most  High :  and  the  Lord  God  shall  give 
unto  Him  the  throne  of  His  father  David :  and  He  shall 
reign  over  the  house  of  Jacob  for  ever;  and  of  His 
kingdom  there  shall  be  no  end.'  From  these  words 
Mary  could  not  fail  to  understand  that  the  Son  to  be 

D  2 


36     OUTLINES  OF  THE  SYNOPTIC  RECORD 

born  to  her  was  to  be  the  expected  Messiah.  In  answer 
to  Mary's  question,  how  this  was  possible  in  her  virgin 
state,  the  angel  declared  that  she  should  become  a 
mother  as  the  result  of  the  direct  visitation  of  Jehovah. 
As  an  assurance  of  the  fulfilment  of  the  promise  the 
angel  made  known  to  Mary  the  pregnancy  of  her  kins- 
woman Elisabeth. 
Visit  of  Mary  thereupon  journeyed  to  Judaea  to  greet  Elisabeth, 

Er^b^th   anc^  receivmg  m  ner  kinswoman's  salutation  a  confirma- 
Luke  i.       tion  of  the  angelic  sign  uttered  a  psalm  of  thanksgiving 
39-56.        ^0  Qq^  known  to  us  as  '  the  Magnificat.'     In  this  hymn 
she  extols  the  mercy  of  God  conferred  upon  her  and 
all  generations  through  her,  and  the  vindication  of  His 
power  in  reversing  human  greatness,  and  in  the  fulfil- 
ment to  Israel  of  His  Messianic  promises. 
Birth  of         The  birth  and  circumcision  of  the  Baptist  are  next 

the  Bap-    re]ate(j      At    the    gathering    of   kinsfolk    for    the    cir- 

tist.    Luke  &  & 

i.  57-80.     cumcision    of    the    child,    his    mother,    when    it    was 

proposed  to  call  him  Zacharias  after  his  father,  insisted 
on  his  receiving  the  name  of  divine  significance,  John 
('  Jehovah's  Gift '),  assigned  by  the  angel  before  his 
birth.  On  appeal  being  made  to  Zacharias  he  too,  by 
writing,  upheld  his  wife's  decision  ;  whereupon  his  power 
of  speech  was  restored,  and  he  broke  forth  into  words 
of  praise.  Those  who  adopt  the  view  mentioned  above 
would  understand  St.  Luke's  narrative  as  referring  to  the 
fact  that  at  this  gathering  Zacharias,  for  the  first  time, 
broke  his  long  and  self-imposed  silence  as  to  the  revela- 
tion made  to  him  in  the  lemple,  and  confessed  the  want 
of  faith  which  had  caused  him  to  conceal  till  now  the 
promise  which  he  had  received  with  regard  to  the  child. 
The  significant  circumstances  accompanying  the  birth 
of  the  child  became  widely  known  '  throughout  all  the 
hill  country  of  Judaea,'  and  caused  him  to  become  an 


THE  INFANCY  AND  CHILDHOOD  37 

object  of  general  interest.  This  recognition  that  the 
Baptist  was  marked  out  by  God  for  some  special  mission 
may  account  for  the  speed  with  which  the  news  of  his 
preaching  spread  through  the  country  as  soon  as  he 
began  his  public  ministry. 

Then  follows  the  Song  of  Praise  of  Zacharias.     This  Zacharias' 
falls  into  two  parts.  |on;?  of 

r  Praise. 

(i)   He   blesses    Jehovah  for   the    fulfilment    of   His  Luke  i 
promises  made  to  Israel  of  old,  that  they  were  to  be  68~79- 
delivered  from   hostile   powers   and   to   serve   Him   in 
security. 

(ii)  He  forecasts  the  destiny  in  store  for  the  child, 
of  preparing  the  way  for  the  coming  of  Jehovah  by 
turning  the  hearts  of  the  people  from  the  darkness  of 
sin  to  the  true  light. 

St.  Luke  closes  this  portion  of  the  narrative  by  a 
summary  description  of  the  growth  of  the  child  in  the 
solitude  of  the  wilderness. 

The  history  next  relates  the  birth  of  Jesus  at  Beth-  The  Birth 
lehem.     St.  Luke  accounts  for  the  presence  of  Joseph  of  Jes^s 

according 

and  Mary  there  by  referring  to  a  decree  of  Augustus  toSt.Luke. 
ordering  an  enrolment  of  the  Roman  world  (7rao-av  ttjv  J^*3  "• 
oiKov/jLtvrjv) ;  for  this  purpose,  he  states,  each  Jew  visited 
his  own  city,  apparently  that  the  reckoning  might  be 
made  in  accordance  with  the  tribal  registers.  Thus 
Joseph,  as  a  descendant  of  David,  went  up  to  Bethlehem 
and  was  accompanied  by  Mary.  '  This,'  St.  Luke  adds, 
'was  the  first  enrolment  made  when  Quirinius  was 
governor  of  Syria.'  During  their  stay  at  Bethlehem 
Mary  '  brought  forth  her  firstborn  son ;  .  .  .  and  laid 
Him  in  a  manger,  because  there  was  no  room  for  them 
in  the  inn.'  The  news  of  the  birth  of  the  Saviour  was 
first  made  known  by  an  angel  to  certain  shepherds 
tending  their  flocks  in  the  open  fields.     The  language 


38     OUTLINES  OF  THE  SYNOPTIC  RECORD 

of  the  angelic  announcement  is  noticeable.  The  angel 
declares  that  he  brings  '  good  tidings  of  great  joy  which 
shall  be  to  all  the  people  (tt6.vtl  tw  Xa<2),y  i.e.  the  Chosen 
Race :  '  for  there  is  born  to  you  this  day  in  the  city  of 
David  a  Saviour,  which  is  anointed  Lord  (Xpio-Tos  Kupios).' 
The  words,  as  they  stand,  would  naturally  adapt  them- 
selves to  the  current  range  of  Jewish  expectations. 
The  shepherds  doubtless  understood  them  as  implying 
that  the  Child  was  to  be  the  promised  King,  with  whose 
coming  the  Messianic  era  was  to  begin  for  Israel.  They 
might,  however,  have  traced  a  wider  scope  in  the 
language  of  the  song  of  praise  raised  by  the  multitude 
of  heavenly  beings  who  appeared  with  the  angel,  '  Glory 
to  God  in  the  highest,  and  on  earth  peace  among  men 
in  whom  He  is  well  pleased  (iv  avOponroLs  e£8o/aa?),' — for 
such  is  the  true  reading  (literally,  '  among  men  of  good 
pleasure'). 
Circumci-       St.  Luke  merely  records,  without  further  detail,  the 

sion  of       £act  0£  foe  circumcision,  at  which  the  Child  received 

Jesus  and 

Presenta-    the  name  '  Jesus,'  as  the  angel  had  directed. 

tion  in  the      jje  reiates,  however,  more  fully  the  circumstances  of 

Luke  ii.      the  visit  of  Joseph  and  Mary  to  present  the  Child  in 

21-39.        ^e  temple,  and  to  offer  the  customary  sacrifice  for  His 

mother's  purification. 

Two  persons  appear  in  connexion  with  this  visit  to 

the   temple,  who   attract   our  attention.     The  first  of 

these  is  Simeon,  a  man  distinguished  for  uprightness 

and  piety  of  character,  to  whom  a  divine  intimation 

had  been  given  that  during  his  life-time  he  should  see 

the  Messiah.     On  their  entering  the  temple  he  received 

the  Child  into  his  arms,  and  broke  forth  into  a  psalm 

of   thanksgiving   to   God,  expressing   his   readiness   to 

depart  now  that  he  had  been  assured  of  the  fulfilment 

of  the  Messianic  promise.     Then  turning  to  Joseph  and 


THE  INFANCY  AND  CHILDHOOD  39 

His  mother,  he  foretold  to  Mary  the  future  destiny  of 
the  Child ;  his  words,  *  This  Child  is  set  for  the  falling 
and  rising  up  of  many  in  Israel,'  pointed  to  the  fact 
that  it  must  be  His  work,  as  Messiah,  to  bring  to  light 
the  true  and  false  elements  in  the  life  of  the  nation, 
since  these  would  be  tested  by  men's  acceptance  or 
rejection  of  Him ;  he  further  foretold  the  piercing  of 
heart  which  Mary  would  experience  at  the  rejection 
of  her  Son. 

The  other  prominent  figure  in  this  narrative  is  Anna, 
a  widow  of  great  age,  who  made  her  abode  in  the 
temple  courts.  She  too  joined  the  group  and  added 
her  praises  to  those  of  Simeon,  '  and  spake  of  Him  to 
all  them  that  were  looking  for  the  redemption  of 
Jerusalem.' 

We  catch,  in  these  two  figures,  a  glimpse  of  genuine 
Jewish  piety,  still  surviving  amid  the  prevalent  material- 
ism of  the  national  life.  Simeon  and  Anna  represent 
that  better  type  of  Pharisaic  religion,  which  fifty  years 
earlier  finds  expression  in  the  Psalms  of  Solomon,  a 
Jewish  writing  of  the  school  of  the  Pharisees.  The 
scene  shows  us  that  even  then  there  were  in  Israel 
simple  pious  souls,  who  looked  for  a  spiritual  fulfilment 
of  the  Messianic  prophecies. 

Joseph  and  Mary  then  returned  to  Nazareth,  and 
St.  Luke  once  more  sums  up  in  a  few  words  the  life  of 
subjection  and  silent  growth  of  the  Child  Jesus.  We 
notice  that  His  preparation,  unlike  that  of  His  kinsman 
John,  takes  place  in  the  circle  of  the  home.  This  is  in 
keeping  with  the  difference  of  character  which  marked 
their  subsequent  missions. 

St.    Matthew's    Gospel    opens   with    the    genealogy,  Birth  of 
followed  by  the  account  of  the  birth  of  Jesus.  Jesus  ac" 


40     OUTLINES  OF  THE  SYNOPTIC  RECORD 

cording  to      Mary,   being   espoused  to  Joseph,   was  found  with 

thew.at~  child  of  the  Holy  Ghost-  Thereupon  Joseph,  wishing 
Matt.  i.  18-  to  put  her  away,  was  forbidden  to  do  so  by  a  dream, 
in  which  an  angel  bade  him  take  unto  him  Mary  his 
wife,  for  that  which  was  conceived  in  her  was  of  the 
Holy  Ghost,  adding  that  she  should  bear  a  Son,  whom 
he  should  call  '  Jesus,'  since  He  should  save  His  people 
(rbv  Xabv  avrov)  from  their  sins. 

St.  Matthew  characteristically  traces  in  this  event 
a  fulfilment  of  the  prophecy  in  Isa.  vii  of  the  child 
to  be  born  to  a  virgin  (or  maiden,  R.V.  margin),  and 
called  Emmanuel. 

He  then  narrates  that  the  birth  of  Jesus  took  place 

at  Bethlehem  in  the  days  of  Herod  the  king.     There 

is  nothing  in  the  narrative  to  imply  that  Bethlehem 

had  not  been  previously  the  residence  of  Joseph  and 

Mary. 

The  Com-       Next  follows  the  account  of  the  coming  of  the  wise 

M-g^f  l*d    men  fr°m  tne  -East  t°  Jerusalem,  to  pay  their  homage 

the  Flight  to  the  Infant  who  was  '  born  King  of  the  Jews,'  declaring 

^to  .         that  they  had  seen  His  star  in  the  East  and  were  come 

Matt.  ii.     to  worship  Him.     We  know  from   heathen  historians 

that  at  this  time  an  expectation  was  prevalent  in  the 

East  that  out  of  Judaea  should  rise  a  king  who  should 

conquer  the  world.     On  the  Magi  reaching  Jerusalem 

and  inquiring  for  '  Him  that  was  born  King  of  the  Jews,' 

the  Chief  Priests  and  Scribes,  being  consulted  by  Herod, 

declared  that  the  Christ  should  be  born  in  Bethlehem 

of   Judaea,   basing   their  conclusion  on  the  words  of 

Cf.  Mic.      Micah's  prophecy. 

On  the  departure  of  the  Magi  Joseph  was  warned 
by  an  angel  in  a  dream  to  flee  with  the  young  Child 
and  His  mother  into  Egypt  by  night,  to  escape  the  plots 
of  Herod.     St.  Matthew  sees  in  this  residence  in  Egypt 


THE  INFANCY  AND  CHILDHOOD  41 

a  fulfilment  of  the  words  of  Hosea,  referring  primarily 

to  the  national  deliverance,  '  Out  of  Egypt  did  I  call  Hos.  xi.  1. 

My  Son.' 

We  have  here  an  instance  of  the  method  of  adapting 
Old  Testament  prophecies  which  is  common  in  this 
Gospel.  Thus,  here,  the  Evangelist  sees  in  this  incident 
of  the  life  of  Jesus,  the  true  Son  of  God,  a  fulfilment 
of  that  which  was  typified  in  the  life  of  the  Israelite 
nation.  In  Herod's  massacre  of  the  children  at  Beth- 
lehem he  again  traces  the  fulfilment  of  a  prophecy 
of  Jeremiah,  which  spoke  of  the  weeping  of  Rachel  for  Cf.  Jer.^ 
her  children ;  the  original  reference  of  this  prophecy  XXX1" 
was  to  the  lamentation  over  the  national  calamities, 
as  a  body  of  Jewish  captives  assembled  at  Ramah,  the 
burial-place  of  Rachel,  on  their  way  to  be  deported  to 
Babylon  in  the  time  of  Nebuchadnezzar. 

On  the  death  of  Herod  Joseph  received  a  divine  Residence 
intimation  bidding  him  return  to  Judaea ;  but  from  ^azaret}1# 
fear  of  Archelaus,  who  had  succeeded  his  father  in  the  Matt.  ii.  23. 
rule  of  that  province,  he  withdrew  into  Galilee,  and 
took  up  his  abode  at  Nazareth.  St.  Matthew  shows  no 
knowledge  that  this  had  been  the  previous  home  of 
Joseph  and  Mary.  In  the  residence  at  Nazareth  he 
again  sees  a  special  significance :  '  that  it  might  be  ful- 
filled which  was  spoken  by  the  prophets,  He  shall  be 
called  a  Nazarene.'  The  reference  in  question  is 
quite  uncertain,  and  the  use  of  the  plural  'prophets' 
may  imply  that  no  particular  prophecy  is  intended; 
it  may,  however,  allude  to  the  canonical  divisions 
of  the  Jewish  Scriptures.  Probably  the  name  recalled 
the  saying  in  Isa.  xi.  1  as  to  the  branch  (Netzer) 
which  should  spring  from  the  roots  of  Jesse. 

St.  Matthew  records  nothing  of  the  childhood  of  Jesus  Episode 


42     OUTLINES  OF  THE  SYNOPTIC  RECORD 

from  the    and  His  life  at  Nazareth,  but  St.  Luke,  in  addition  to 
Child-        Yiis  general  description  of  the  years  of  silent  growth, 
Luke  ii.      has  preserved  one  striking  incident. 
40-51.  ^  the  age  of  twelve  the  Child  Jesus  had  gone  up  with 

His  parents  to  Jerusalem  to  the  Passover.  On  their 
return  from  the  feast  He  was  missed  by  them,  and, 
after  three  days'  search,  was  found  in  the  courts  of  the 
temple,  sitting  as  a  pupil  at  the  feet  of  the  teachers 
of  the  law.  In  answer  to  His  mother's  expostulation 
He  replied  with  the  words,  '  How  is  it  that  ye  sought 
Me  ?  Wist  ye  not  that  I  must  be  in  My  Father's  house 
(iv  rots  tov  -n-arpos  [toy)  V  It  is  possible  to  read  into  this 
answer  a  deeper  meaning  than  is  naturally  contained 
in  the  words :  yet  this  is  unnecessary ;  for,  in  some 
sense,  the  idea  of  the  temple  as  the  house  of  his  Father 
would  be  present  to  every  truly  pious  Israelite.  We 
see,  at  any  rate,  how  deeply  that  idea  had  impressed 
itself  on  the  mind  of  the  Child  Jesus.  But  yet  the 
words  'My  Father'  seem  to  suggest  the  awakening  in 
the  Child's  heart  of  the  consciousness  of  a  peculiar 
relationship  to  Jehovah,  even  if,  as  yet,  they  did  not 
carry  with  it  the  knowledge  of  His  own  Messiahship. 
The  surprise  evinced  by  His  parents  shows  clearly  that 
there  had  been  nothing  in  the  previous  home  life  of 
Jesus  to  lead  them  to  expect  any  such  independence  of 
action  as  He  displayed  on  this  occasion. 
The  Life  at  St.  Luke  records  that  He  then  returned  with  them  to 
Nazareth.  Nazareth  and  there  lived  a  life  of  filial  obedience.     The 

Luke  11. 52. 

history  of  the  remaining  years,  up  to  His  public  appear- 
ance, is  summed  up  by  the  Evangelist  in  the  single 
sentence  :  '  Jesus  advanced  in  wisdom  and  stature,  and  in 
favour  with  God  and  men.' 
General  In  conclusion,  a  few  points  call  for  notice  in  regard 

Observe     ^o  j^ese  narratives  of  the  infancy  and  childhood  of 


THE  INFANCY  AND  CHILDHOOD  43 

Jesus  and  the  Baptist.    The  account's  in  our  two  Gospels  tions  on 
are  almost  certainly  independent.     It  seems  impossible  ^^.^ 
to  suppose  either  that  one  Evangelist  knew  the  account  Infancy 
of  the  other,  or  that  both  used  the  same  source  and  ^Jod hl 
selected  different  incidents  from  it.    Thus  the  two  tradi- 
tions appear  to  differ  as  to  the  original  residence  of 
Joseph  and  Mary,which  St.  Matthew  places  at  Bethlehem, 
St.  Luke  at  Nazareth.     St.  Luke's  information  appears 
throughout  to  be  fuller  and  more  complete. 

It  has  been  commonly  supposed  that  his  narrative 
originated,  either  directly  or  indirectly,  with  the  re- 
collections of  Mary.  This  of  course  is  only  conjectural, 
but  the  idea  finds  some  support  from  the  internal 
character  of  the  record  :  since  (i)  many  of  the  incidents 
recorded  could  have  been  known  to  her  only,  (ii)  In 
two  passages  St.  Luke  seems  to  throw  out  a  hint  that 
Mary  is  his  authority :  ii.  19,  '  But  Mary  kept  all  these 
sayings,  pondering  them  in  her  heart';  ii.  51,  '  And 
His  mother  kept  all  these  sayings  in  her  heart.' 

It  has  been  suggested  that  in  the  same  way 
St.  Matthew  may  have  derived  his  information  from 
Joseph.  This  supposition,  however,  has  much  less  to 
recommend  it :  any  evidence  in  its  support  is  as  yet 
wanting,  while  it  has  further  to  encounter  the  difficulty 
that  Joseph  would  appear  to  have  died  before  the 
opening  of  the  public  ministry  of  Jesus.  We  notice 
that  every  incident  in  St.  Matthew's  narrative  is  in 
some  way  connected  with  the  fulfilment  of  prophecy. 
He  may  possibly  have  used  some  compilation  drawn  up 
to  show  that  the  birth  of  Jesus  fulfilled  the  Messianic 
prophecies  of  the  Old  Testament ;  but  this  reference  to 
prophecy  is  characteristic  of  his  Gospel  throughout. 

As  regards  St.  Luke's  account,  the  further  question 
arises,  was  the  source  which  he  used  written  or  oral  1 


44     OUTLINES  OF  THE  SYNOPTIC  RECORD 

(i)  Most  critics  hold  that  in  these  chapters  he  is  using 
an  Aramaic  document  or  documents.  Some  believe 
that  in  three  passages,  each  of  which  seems  to  form 
the  conclusion  of  a  narrative,  we  can  trace  the  point 
where  three  such  documents  ended.  These  are  chap. 
i.  80,  'And  the  Child  grew,  and  waxed  strong  in  spirit,' 
&c. ;  ii.  40,  'The  Child  grew,  and  waxed  strong,  filled 
with  wisdom :  and  the  grace  of  God  was  upon  Him ' ; 
ii.  52,  '  And  Jesus  advanced  in  wisdom  and  stature,  and 
in  favour  with  God  and  men.'  These  passages,  how- 
ever, do  not  seem  to  mark  any  break  in  the  continuity 
of  the  style  and  narrative.  The  Hebraistic  phraseology 
too,  which  is  specially  prominent  in  these  chapters,  may 
point  to  St.  Luke's  use  of  an  Aramaic  document ;  but, 
on  the  other  hand,  he  always  shows  a  peculiar  capacity 
for  adapting  his  style  to  his  subject. 

(ii)  Others  hold  that  in  compiling  these  chapters 
St.  Luke  is  drawing  solely  from  oral  tradition.  In 
that  case  he  deliberately  adopted  a  Hebraistic  style 
of  writing,  as  suited  to  the  character  of  the  narrative. 
It  is  noticeable  how  closely  these  chapters  resemble  the 
Septuagint  in  style ;  and  it  may  well  be  that  St.  Luke 
or  his  source  deliberately  adopted  that  as  a  model. 
This  would  be  all  the  more  natural  from  the  close 
resemblance  which  several  of  the  events  related  bear  to 
similar  incidents  in  the  Old  Testament.  This  is  most 
noticeable  in  the  Songs,  which  may  have  been  derived 
from  an  independent  source.  They  are  permeated 
throughout  by  Old  Testament  language.  The  Magnificat, 
for  instance,  bears  a  close  resemblance  to  the  Song  of 
Hannah  (1  Sam.  ii.  1-11).  And  in  view  of  the  close 
similarity  of  the  incidents,  it  was  natural  that  this 
should  have  formed  a  model  for  Mary's  Song.  The 
Benedicius  again  is  full  of  the  language  of  the  Psalms, 


THE  INFANCY  AND  CHILDHOOD  45 

while  the   Nunc  Dimitlis   is   drawn    chiefly  from   the 
Second  Isaiah. 

Throughout  these  Songs  we  cannot  fail  to  notice  how 
extremely  appropriate  they  are  to  the  characters  and 
circumstances  described.  There  is  nothing  in  any  of 
them  out  of  harmony  with  the  natural  point  of  view  of 
the  speaker.  Their  theological  character,  especially  in 
regard  to  the  Messianic  hope,  is  exactly  such  as  we 
might  expect  to  find  in  the  most  pious  and  Cod-fearing 
representatives  of  the  chosen  race  just  before  the  coming 
of  Christ.  Nor  is  there  anything  in  them  which  points 
to  the  interpretation  given  by  the  subsequent  history  of 
Jesus.  They  contain  really  little,  if  any,  advance  on 
the  Messianic  conceptions  of  the  Old  Testament ;  though 
for  our  nearest  equivalent  in  Messianic  ideas  we  turn  to 
the  Psalms  of  Solomon.  Throughout,  the  revelation  is 
regarded  as  one  to  be  made  primarily  to  the  Chosen 
People ;  in  the  Song  of  Simeon  indeed  there  is  an 
expectation  of  its  extension  to  the  Gentiles,  but  even 
this  hardly  passes  beyond  the  point  of  view  of  the  Old 
Testament  prophets ;  for  they  too  clearly  implied  that 
the  Gentiles  should  in  some  way  share  in  the  blessings 
of  the  Messianic  age. 

ADDITIONAL    NOTE   I. 
THE   GENEALOGIES. 

Matthew  i.  1-18  ;   Luke  iii.  23-38. 

Considerable  difficulty  surrounds  the  two  genealogies 
of  Jesus,  given  respectively  by  our  first  and  third 
Evangelists,  and  their  bearing  on  His  descent  from 
David.  The  two  genealogies  are  clearly  quite  in- 
dependent of  each  other,  and  their  divergences  are 
such  as  to  require  some  explanation  to  account  for  them. 


46     OUTLINES  OF  THE  SYNOPTIC  RECORD 

The  whole  question  will  be  found  discussed  in  Professor 
Sanday's  article  in  Hastings'  Dictionary  of  the  Bible 
(vol.  ii,  'Jesus  Christ')  and  other  books  dealing  with 
the  subject.  'The  genealogy  in  the  First  Gospel,' 
Professor  Sanday  says,  '  bears  upon  its  face  its  artificial 
structure.  The  Evangelist  himself  points  out  (Matt. 
i.  17)  that  it  is  arranged  in  three  groups  of  fourteen 
generations,  though  these  groups  are  obtained  by  certain 
deliberate  omissions.  ...  It  would  seem  that  a  like 
artificial  arrangement  (seventy-seven  generations,  7x11) 
underlies  the  genealogy  in  St.  Luke.' 

St.  Matthew  traces  the  ancestry  of  Joseph  back  to 
David,  St.  Luke  to  Adam.  The  differences  in  the  names 
of  the  two  have  given  rise  to  the  theory  that  St.  Luke 
gives  the  genealogy  of  Mary,  not  of  Joseph.  Yet 
St.  Luke  seems  clearly  to  imply  that  he  is  giving  the 
genealogy  of  Joseph,  while  that  Jesus  should  trace  His 
descent  through  His  mother  would  be  quite  contrary 
to  Jewish  ideas.  Certain  variants  found  in  the  early 
versions  in  the  text  of  St.  Matthew  give  some  support 
to  the  idea  that  his  genealogy  in  its  original  form  was 
based  on  the  assumption  that  Jesus  was  the  natural  son 
of  Joseph.  This  of  course  would  be  quite  inconsistent 
with  the  rest  of  the  narrative  in  St.  Matthew,  which 
clearly  sets  forth  the  virgin  birth. 

Two  explanations  may  be  given  to  account  for  the 
origin  of  the  variants  in  the  text  of  Matt.  i.  16. 

(i)  It  has  been  suggested  that  the  genealogy  is  a  later 
insertion  into  the  Gospel  of  a  heretical  character, 
coming  probably  from  the  circle  of  those  Jewish 
Christians  who  rejected  the  virgin  birth,  holding  that 
our  Lord  was  the  Son  of  Joseph  and  Mary. 

(ii)  Possibly,  again,  they  may  be  due  to  an  earlier 
tradition,  dating  from  a  time  before  the  true  facts  as  to 
the  birth  of  Jesus  were  generally  known  in  the  Church. 
It  seems  likely  that  the  story  of  the  virgin  birth  was  for 
a  considerable  time  imparted  only  to  a  favoured  few. 

In  any  case  the  genealogies  seem  to  form  no  integral 
part  of  the  narrative  in  either  Gospel,  while  that  in 
St.  Luke,  as  it  stands,  breaks  the  continuity  of  the 
history. 


THE  INFANCY  AND  CHILDHOOD  47 

ADDITIONAL  NOTE  II. 
ON  THE  DATE  OF  THE  BIRTH  OF  JESUS. 

The  date  assigned  by  St.  Luke  to  the  birth  of  Jesus  St.  Luke's 
presents  a  problem  of  some  difficulty.     He  says  (chap.  J^8  of 
ii.  1,  2)  that '  in  those  days '  (i.  e.  the  days  of  King  Herod)  Blrth' 
Augustus  issued  a  decree  for  holding  an  enrolment  of 
the  Roman  world,  and  that  the  presence  of  Joseph  and 
Mary  at  Bethlehem  was  for  the  purposes  of  this  enrol- 
ment :  he  further  states  that  it  took  place  when  Quiri- 
nius  was  governor  of  Syria. 

It  will  be  well  to  give  St.  Luke's  actual  words  :  'EyeVero 

Se  iv  rats  rj/mepais  eKeiVcus  ££r}\0ev  Soy/xa  rrapa  Kattrapos  Avyov- 
<ttov  a.7roypd(j)€cr6ai  iracav  rrjv  olKOV/JLevrjv'  (avrr]  airoypa^irj  irp^ry] 
eyevero  rjye/AovevovTOS  rrj<;  ^vpta<;  Kvprjvcov).  The  last  sen- 
tence must  mean  literally,  '  This  took  place  as  a  first 
enrolment,  when  Quirinius  was  governor  of  Syria' 
(the  article  f]  before  aTroypa^rj  must  be  omitted  with  the 
best  MSS.).  What  was  the  decree  of  Augustus  to  which 
St.  Luke  here  refers  ?  When  did  this  enrolment  under 
Quirinius  take  place  ?  These  questions  are  not  easy  to 
answer,  and  have  given  rise  to  much  discussion. 

An  enrolment  in  Judaea  in  a.  d.  6,  when  Quirinius 
was  governor  of  Syria,  is  mentioned  by  Josephus,  the 
Jewish  historian,  and  referred  to  by  St.  Luke  in  Acts  v. 
37,  in  his  account  of  Gamaliel's  speech  in  the  Sanhedrin, 
as  r]  airoypa^rj :  yet  this  cannot  be  the  enrolment  in- 
tended in  the  Gospel,  since  that  took  place  before  the 
death  of  Herod,  b.  c.  4. 

In  considering  St.  Luke's  statement  several  points 
call  for  notice  : — 

(i)  We  have  no  other  direct  evidence  of  a  decree  of  TheDecree 
Augustus  for  the  enrolment  of  the  Roman  Empire  (<ri)v  °f  Aygus- 
oLKovfxevrjv)  i  jet  we  know  that  it  was  the  practice  of  that  Qesne^f 
Emperor  to  make  all  possible  provision  for  collecting  Enrol- 
statistics  and  tabulating  information  as  to  all  parts  of  ment. 
the   Empire;    hence  such  a  measure  as  that  here  at- 
tributed to  him  by   St.  Luke  would  fall  in  with   his 
recognized  policy.     The  general  statement  of  the  Evan- 


48     OUTLINES  OF  THE  SYNOPTIC  RECORD 


How  far 
it  would 
apply  in 
Herod's 
Domin- 


The  Man- 
ner of  its 
Execution 
left  to 
Herod. 


gelist  need  not  be  pressed  to  mean  that  a  simultaneous 
enrolment  was  held  throughout  the  Empire :  'According 
to  St.  Luke's  ways  of  mentioning  Roman  matters,  he 
need  not  be  taken  as  meaning  more  than  that  Augustus 
laid  down  the  theoretic  principle  that  periodic  census 
ought  to  be  made  of  the  Empire '  (Ramsay  in  Expositor). 
St.  Luke  makes  a  similar  general  statement  in  Acts 
xi.  28,  where  he  speaks  of  the  scarcity  in  different  parts 
of  the  Empire  under  Claudius  as  a  famine. 

(ii)  It  has  been  questioned  whether  such  a  decree 
would  apply  to  the  dominions  of  Herod,  who  occupied 
the  semi-independent  position  of  a  Rex  Socius.  In  the 
case  of  kingdoms  such  as  Herod's  was,  the  degree  of 
independence  enjoyed  depended  on  the  terms  of  the 
treaty  made  with  the  king :  the  terms  of  the  treaty 
with  Herod  were  exceptionally  favourable ;  and  it 
would  certainly  seem  that  under  its  conditions  an  en- 
rolment made  for  purposes  of  taxation  (and  this  would, 
as  a  rule,  be  the  object  of  such  enrolments)  would  be 
excluded.  We  know,  however,  that  the  relations  be- 
tween Augustus  and  Herod  became  strained  during  the 
last  years  of  Herod's  life ;  so  that  Augustus  announced 
his  intention  of  treating  him  in  future  '  as  a  subject  and 
not  as  a  friend'  (Josephus,  Antiq.  xvi.  9.  3).  Under 
these  circumstances  if  a  'suggestion'  proceeded  from 
Augustus  to  Herod  that  the  general  order  for  an  enrol- 
ment should  apply  to  his  dominions,  this  must  have 
been  regarded  by  the  latter  in  the  light  of  a  command. 

(iii)  In  that  case  Augustus,  having  made  known  his 
wishes  to  Herod,  would  be  likely  to  leave  the  manner 
of  their  execution  in  his  hands.  In  carrying  them  out 
Herod  would  naturally  wish  to  have  regard,  as  far  as 
possible,  to  Jewish  susceptibilities.  By  causing  the  en- 
rolment to  be  made  in  accordance  with  tribal  registers, 
which  were,  we  know,  carefully  preserved,  he  could  at 
once  disguise  the  slight  put  upon  his  own  authority, 
and  avoid  giving  to  the  measure  too  distinctly  the 
character  of  an  act  of  submission  to  a  foreign  power. 
In  this  respect  this  enrolment  would  differ  from  that  of 
a.  d.  6,  which  was  carried  out  in  Roman  fashion ;  and 
the  more  objectionable  character  thus  given  to  the  latter 


THE  INFANCY  AND  CHILDHOOD  49 

in  the  eyes  of  the  Jews  will  account  for  the  outbreak 
to  which  it  led  (Josephus,  Antiq.  xviii.  1).  Here,  then, 
we  have  a  probable  explanation  of  the  fact  stated  by 
St.  Luke,  that  Joseph  and  Mary  were  required  to  come 
up  to  Bethlehem  to  be  enrolled,  '  because  he  (Joseph) 
was  of  the  house  and  family  of  David.' 

(iv)  The  mention  of  Quirinius  raises  more  serious  diffi-  The  Refei 
culty.  We  know  that  he  became  governor  of  Syria  in  ence  to 
a.  d.  6;  and  in  that  capacity  carried  out  the  famous  Quinnms 
enrolment  mentioned  by  Josephus  and  referred  to  in 
Acts  v.  37.  The  reason  for  holding  an  enrolment  in 
this  case  was  that  Judaea  was  in  that  }7ear  taken  over 
and  made  part  of  the  province  of  Syria.  Other  evi- 
dence indeed  renders  it  probable  that  this  was  Quirinius' 
second  term  of  office :  in  that  case  it  is  uncertain  what 
was  the  date  of  his  first  governorship,  but  it  seems 
impossible  to  find  room  for  it  during  the  last  years  of 
Herod's  life,  as  required  by  St.  Luke's  narrative  :  since 
we  know  that  the  governorship  was  held  by  Sentius 
Saturninus  (9-6  b.  c.)  and  Quintilius  Varus  (6-4  b.  c). 
No  satisfactory  explanation  of  this  difficulty  has  yet 
been  put  forward.  Some  suggest  that  the  term  ^yc/xo- 
vcvovtos  is  not  here  employed  in  its  usual  sense,  and 
that  Quirinius  was  not  the  regular  governor  of  the 
province,  but  a  legate  invested  with  extraordinary 
powers  for  carrying  on  the  war  with  the  Homadenses, 
while  Varus  was  in  charge  of  the  ordinary  administra- 
tion of  the  province.  This  explanation  is  not  very 
satisfactory,  as  in  that  case  there  seems  to  be  no  reason 
why  St.  Luke  should  have  mentioned  Quirinius  rather 
than  Varus,  the  regular  governor,  especially  as  the 
latter  would  have  been  responsible  for  supervising  the 
enrolment.  The  suggestion  that  Quirinius  was  an  ex- 
traordinary legate  sent  for  carrying  out  the  enrolment 
(legatus  ad  census  capiendos)  is  also  untenable  if  the 
view  here  adopted  as  to  the  character  of  the  enrolment 
be  correct.  A  more  probable  suggestion  would  find  in 
the  text  of  St.  Luke  a  primitive  error,  by  which  Kvprjviov 
has  been  substituted  for  KwtlXlov — an  error  which  might 
naturally  arise  owing  to  the  association  of  the  name  of 
Quirinius  with  the  more  famous  airoypa^rj.      Possibly, 

E 


50     OUTLINES  OF  THE  SYNOPTIC  RECORD 


The 

Periodic 
Enrol- 
ments in 
Egypt. 


however,  the  same  cause  led  St.  Luke,  or  the  writer  of 
the  document  which  he  is  here  using,  to  introduce  the 
name  of  Quirinius  erroneously  at  this  place. 

Fresh  light  has  of  late  been  thrown  on  the  subject 
from  the  Egyptian  papyri.  We  learn  from  these  that 
periodic  enrolments  (d-n-oypacfyat)  by  households  were 
under  the  Empire  held  in  Egypt  every  fourteen  years. 
The  records  of  them  do  not  at  present  carry  us  back 
earlier  than  a.  d.  20,  but  Professor  Ramsay  has  shown 
that  it  is  probable  that  their  institution  dates  from 
b.  c.  23,  when  Augustus  first  assumed  the  tribunician 
power.  The  evidence  for  them,  it  is  true,  is  at  present 
confined  to  Egypt ;  but  if  the  system  formed  part  of 
a  regular  Imperial  policy,  we  might  expect  to  find  it 
introduced  into  other  proviuces  of  the  Empire,  including 
Syria.  In  that  case  St.  Luke's  statement  would  distin- 
guish the  enrolment  at  which  the  birth  of  Jesus  took 
place  as  being  the  first  of  this  series  of  periodic  enrol- 
ments which  was  held  in  Syria.  In  the  regular  course, 
indeed,  if  the  census  years  were  the  same  in  Syria  and 
in  Egypt,  this  should  have  fallen  b.  c.  8-9.  If,  how- 
ever, the  system  was  then  first  applied  to  Syria,  a  delay 
of  two  or  three  years  in  putting  it  into  force  would  be 
not  improbable.  Herod  would  be  naturally  reluctant 
to  carry  out  a  measure  which  was  sure  to  be  most 
unpopular  with  his  subjects,  and  might  have  endea- 
voured to  obtain  from  the  Emperor  a  revocation  of  the 
command  imposing  the  enrolment  on  his  dominions. 
In  that  case  the  census  might  not  have  taken  effect  in 
his  territory  till  b.  c.  6.  Even  this  requires  us  to  place 
the  date  of  our  Lord's  birth  a  year  or  two  earlier  than 
that  which  has  been  usually  assigned  to  it.  In  any 
case  the  difficulty  as  to  the  mention  of  Quirinius  still 
remains  unsolved. 

The  evidence  for  the  application  of  these  periodic 
enrolments  to  Syria  is  as  yet  far  from  complete ;  but 
it  is  at  least  possible  that  a  solution  of  this  vexed 
problem  may  be  found  on  the  lines  here  suggested.  In 
the  present  state  of  our  knowledge  it  is  impossible  to 
arrive  at  any  more  definite  conclusion  on  the  question. 


CHAPTER    II 

THE   BAPTIST 

The  Mission  of  the  Baptist— His  Preaching.— Its  Effect.— Bap- 
tism of  Jesus. — Imprisonment  of  the  Baptist.— Message  to 
Jesus. — Parable  of  Two  Sons. —  Death  of  the  Baptist. — 
Results  of  his  Work. 

Mark  i.  1-11,  vi.  14-29;  Matthew  iii,  xi.  2-19,  xiv. 
3-12,  xxi.  28-32 ;  Luke  iii.  1-22,  vii.  18-35 ;  John 
i.  19-28,  32-34. 

The    preparation    of    John   for    his    mission   in   the  The  Bap- 
solitude    of    the    wilderness    lasted    for    thirty    years.  tl.st's  Mls~ 

sion. 

St.  Luke  states  that  his  public  appearance  took  place  Marki.1-6. 
in  the  fifteenth  year  of  the  reign  (rjyefjLovLas)  of  Tiberius.  J^fct-  m- 
We  cannot,  however,  be  certain  what  is  the  year  referred  Luke  iii. 
to,  owing  to  a  doubt  as  to  when  St.  Luke  dates  the  1_6- 
beginning  of  Tiberius's  reign.     On  the  whole  it  seems 
probable   that   he   reckons  from  the  year  a.  d.   11-12, 
when  Tiberius  was  given  joint  authority  with  Augustus 
in  the  provinces  outside  Italy.     This  would  naturally  be 
considered  the  beginning  of   his   reign.     In   that  case 
the  fifteenth  year  would  be  a.d.  25-26. 

The  scene  of  John's  preaching  was  the  wilderness 
of  the  Jordan  valley,  to  the  north  of  the  Dead  Sea : 
it  was  not  confined  solely  to  either  bank  of  the  river. 
Professor  Adam  Smith  has  pointed  out  how  suitable 
the  locality  was  for  the  purpose.     It  supplied  both  the 

e  2 


52     OUTLINES  OF  THE  SYNOPTIC  RECORD 

1  much  water  '  required  for  his  baptism,  and  the  solitude 
which  was  in  keeping  with  the  character  of  his  mission. 
But  it  was  further  consecrated  by  its  association  with 
the  history  of  Elijah  and  Elisha.  We  notice  how  John 
gives  point  to  his  teaching  by  reference  to  surrounding 
objects,  drawing  his  illustrations  from  the  stones  of  the 
river-bed,  and  the  trees  of  the  neighbouring  jungle, 
as  they  fell  beneath  the  axe  of  the  wood-cutter. 

Here,  then,  John,  by  his  call  to  repentance,  began  his 
work  of  preparation  for  the  coming  of  the  Messiah. 
The  Synoptists  all  dwell  on  the  deep  and  widespread 
impression  produced  by  his  work  and  his  message.  Men 
universally  agreed  that  he  held  a  position  of  unique 
importance ;  they  felt  that  he  was  no  ordinary  teacher, 
such  as  they  had  seen  before ;  for  they  realized  that,  in 
this  new  preacher,  there  was  once  more  restored  to  Israel 
the  spirit  of  the  old  prophets.  This  central  aspect  of 
his  work  had  been  foreshadowed  in  the  Song  of  Zacharias, 
'and  thou,  child,  shalt  be  called  the  prophet  of  the 
Most  High.' 

It  will  be  well  to  recall  what  this  announcement,  that 
a  prophet  had  arisen  in  Israel,  would  mean  to  the  Jews 
of  that  age.  Throughout  Old  Testament  times  the 
prophets  had  been  the  recognized  expounders  of  the 
Will  of  Jehovah.  They  were  His  official  representatives, 
through  whom  the  Divine  commands  were  declared  to 
the  nation.  During  Israel's  history,  from  Samuel  to 
Malachi,  the  succession  had  continued  unbroken.  But 
when  John  came  forth,  for  about  four  hundred  years 
the  order  had  been  extinct,  the  voice  of  prophecy  had 
been  silent.  Hence  the  universal  excitement  which 
ensued  when  it  was  rumoured  throughout  Palestine  that 
beside  the  Jordan  a  prophet  had  once  more  appeared. 

John's   outward   appearance  and    ascetic  manner  of 


THE  BAPTIST  53 

life  were  in  accordance  with  his  prophetic  character. 
He  lived  on  such  food  as  the  wilderness  supplied,  locusts 
and  wild  honey;  while  his  raiment  of  camel's  hair 
and  leathern  girdle  recalled,  perhaps  intentionally,  the 
description  of  Elijah  (2  Kings  i.  8).  Ear  and  wide  the 
news  spread;  so  that  from  Jerusalem  and  all  Judaea, 
as  well  as  from  the  country  beyond  the  Jordan,  all 
classes  came  forth  to  him  into  the  wilderness. 

The  burden  of  his  message  was  unmistakable  :  '  Repent  Preaching 
ye ;  for  the  kingdom  of  heaven  is  at  hand. '     He  came,  ll^Fen' 
he  declared,  to  announce  the  advent  of  the  Messianic  Matt.  iii. 
Kingdom,  and  called  on  the  nation  to  prepare  for  it  ^uk^  -. 
by  a  complete  reformation.     Men  specially  noted  how  7-9. 
he  applied  to  himself  the  words  of  the  prophet  of  the 
Exile,  in  which  he  had  called  on   his  countrymen  to  isa.  xl.  3  if. 
make  ready  for  the  coming  of  Jehovah  to  deliver  them 
from   captivity  and   restore  them  to  their   land ;    and 
also   the   prophecy  of  Malachi,  in  which  the   prophet  Mai.  iii  1. 
announced  that  he  was  sent  as  a  messenger  to  prepare 
for  the  advent  of  Jehovah  to  purge  His  temple. 

But  John  made  a  further  demand  on  those  who 
came  to  hear  him.  He  called  upon  all  to  signify  their 
definite  acceptance  of  this  need  of  reformation,  in  order 
to  obtain  remission  of  their  sins,  and  so  be  fit  to  share 
in  the  Messianic  Kingdom,  by  undergoing  the  outward 
rite  of  baptism  in  the  Jordan.  So  prominent  a  feature 
was  this  in  his  ministry  that  from  it  the  name  '  the 
Baptist '  or  '  the  Baptizer '  was  universally  applied  to 
him.  The  practice  of  baptism  as  a  type  of  moral 
cleansing  was  already  familiar  to  the  Jews ;  not  only 
was  it  employed  for  ceremonial  purposes,  as  a  means 
of  purification  from  Levitical  uncleanness,  but,  probably 
even  at  that  date,  it  was  also  used  as  the  ceremony  of 
admission  of  heathen  proselytes  to  Judaism.     Thereby 


54     OUTLINES  OF  THE  SYNOPTIC  RECORD 

they  washed  away  the  defilement  of  their  old  heathen 

life  and  were  admitted  to  a  share  in  the  Jewish  covenant. 

What  was   novel   in   John's  baptism  was  that  it  was 

demanded   from  all  Jews.     He  declared  thereby  that 

all  the  members,  even  of  the  Chosen  Race  itself,  were  not 

of  themselves  fit  to  share  in  the  Messianic  Kingdom, 

until  they  had  been  cleansed  from  the  defilement   of 

their  sinful  life.     As  a  condition,  therefore,  of  receiving 

the  outward  rite  he  required  a  public  confession  of  sin. 

Preaching      But  John's  preaching  was  not  confined  to  this  general 

ent  1  er"    warnmg  °f  the  nation.     St.  Luke  preserves  the  advice 

Classes.      given  to  various  classes  of  the  people,  who  came  and 

lO-lV11      questioned  him   as   to   what   reform   was   required   of 

them.     John's   commands   are    directly   suited   to   the 

particular   questioners  in   each   case,  and  are  entirely 

practical   in   character.     He  required  of   them  neither 

ascetic   practices   nor   outward    observances.      To   the 

people  generally  he  commanded  mutual  charity;    the 

publicans,  who  also  came  to  be  baptized,  he  warned 

against  extortion,  while  he  forbade  the  soldiers  to  extort 

money  by  intimidation  or  false  charges,  and  bade  them 

be  content  with  their  wages. 

Question-       Naturally  the  general  stir  produced  caused  speculation 

jnfm^S  t0   ^°  ^e  rife  as  to  J°nn's  person.     Men  questioned  whether 

Person.      he  were  the  Messiah  or  not.     In  view  of  these  surmises 

^lk.er         a  deputation  of  the  Pharisees  and  chief  priests  was  sent 

Johni.  19-to  interview  the  new  preacher  and  gain  from  him  an 

28,  explicit  statement  of  his  own  claims.     This  deputation 

he  met  with  fierce  denunciation :    addressing  them  as 

offspring  of  vipers,  and  asking  them  who  had  warned 

them,  belonging  as  they  did  to  an  absolutely  self-satisfied 

class,  to  flee  from  the  impending  wrath,  which  would  come 

upon  all  who  did  not  show  the  fruits  of  repentance  in 

their  lives.      The  Jews   expected   that  the   judgement 


THE  BAPTIST  55 

executed  by  the  Messiah  would  exalt  Israel  at  the  expense 
of  the  Gentiles ;  but  John  declared  that  it  would  begin 
with  the  chosen  nation  itself.  It  was  quite  useless  for 
them  to  trust  in  their  descent  from  Abraham  :  that  would 
avail  them  nothing ;  for  he  declared  (playing  upon  the 
Aramaic  word)  that  even  if  the  whole  Chosen  Race  were 
annihilated,  God  could  of  the  very  stones  (abanim)  of 
the  Jordan  valley,  which  lay  beneath  their  feet,  raise 
up  children  (banim)  to  Abraham.  He  employed  two 
figures  to  make  it  clear  that  this  judgement,  which 
should  separate  the  good  and  bad  elements  in  the 
nation,  was  close  at  hand ;  already  the  axe  of  the 
Messiah,  as  of  the  wood-cutter,  was  laid  to  the  root 
of  the  trees,  so  that  every  unproductive  tree  should 
be  hewn  down  and  cast  into  the  fire  ;  again,  the  Messiah 
should  quickly  come  with  His  fan 2  in  His  hand  to  purge 
His  threshing-floor,  by  separating  the  chaff  from  the 
wheat. 

This  address  is  said  by  St.  Matthew  to  have  been 
spoken  to  the  Pharisees  and  Sadducees,  who  came  to 
John's  baptism,  and  who  possibly  composed  the  depu- 
tation mentioned  in  the  Fourth  Gospel.  In  St.  Luke, 
however,  it  is  given  as  representing  the  teaching  of 
John  to  the  multitudes  who  came  out  to  him.  Most 
probably  it  gives  rather  a  sort  of  general  summary 
of  John's  preaching  throughout  his  ministry,  and 
teaching  such  as  this  may  have  been  in  progress  at  the 
time  when  the  deputation  reached  him.  The  Fourth 
Gospel  preserves  the  answers  made  by  John  to  the 
questions  of  those  sent  to  inquire  concerning  his  person 
and  authority.  He  first  stated  that  he  was  not  the 
Christ.  Was  he  then,  they  asked,  Elijah  or  the  prophet 
foretold  in  Deuteronomy  ?  For  each  of  these,  according 
1  Literally  'winnowing  shovel.' 


56     OUTLINES  OF  THE  SYNOPTIC  RECORD 

to  popular  belief,  was  to  appear  to  herald  the  coming 
of  the  Messiah.  Each  of  these  suggestions  John 
repudiated.  Being  further  asked  on  what  grounds  he 
rested  his  right  to  baptize,  he  replied  by  applying  to 
himself  the  prophecy  from  the  second  part  of  Isaiah 
as  to  the  voice  in  the  wilderness,  to  which  reference 
has  already  been  made.  He  went  on  to  foretell  the 
coming  of  One  mightier  than  himself,  meaning  clearly 
the  Messiah,  for  whom  he  was  not  fit  to  perform  even 
the  slave's  office  of  loosing  His  sandal's  latchet.  He 
indeed  administered  the  outward  rite  of  baptism  by 
water,  typifying  the  change  to  a  new  life,  but  the 
Messiah  should  give  them  the  inward  baptism  of  the 
Holy  Spirit  and  of  fire,  imparting  to  men  the  spiritual 
power  within,  which  should  enable  them  to  carry  the 
new  life  into  effect. 

By  the  light  afforded  by  later  references  in  the  Gospel 
narrative  we  gain  further  information  as  to  the  effects 
produced  on  the  different  classes  by  John's  ministry. 
We  are  told  that,  while  the  people  generally,  and  especi- 
ally the  publicans,  accepted  his  baptism,  it  was  rejected 
by  the  Pharisees  and  the  hierarchy.  This  attitude  on 
the  part  of  the  latter  was  only  to  be  expected;  to 
undergo  a  rite  signifying  the  need  of  a  complete  re- 
formation of  life  would  have  been  to  surrender  entirely 
the  claims  which  they  put  forward  as  to  their  religious 
position. 

We  learn,  however,  that  throughout  the  nation  gener- 
ally John's  announcement  of  the  near  approach  of  the 
Messianic  Kingdom  produced  a  remarkable  religious 
disturbance,  so  that  men,  under  the  influence  of  this 
violent  excitement,  tried  to  force  their  way,  as  it  were, 
into  a  share  in  the  new  Kingdom.  The  effects  of  this 
movement  still  survived  in  the  time  of  Jesus,  and  caused 


THE  BAPTIST  57 

;xcited  crowds  to  gather  round  Him  and  His  disciples ; 

in  this  excessive  enthusiasm  Jesus  perceived  much  that 

was  unnatural  and  unhealthy,  as  appears  from  a  saying 

of  His  preserved  in  the  Logia,  '  From  the  days  of  John 

the  Baptist  until  now  the  kingdom  of  heaven  suffereth 

violence,  and  men  of  violence  take  it  by  force  {ap-n-d- 

£ov<rw).'     This  seems  the  natural  meaning  of  the  saying 

as  preserved  by  St.  Matthew ;  it  is  possible,  however, 

if  we  follow  St.  Luke's  version,  'From  that  time'  (i.e. 

the  days  of  John)  '  the  gospel  of  the  kingdom  of  God 

is  preached,  and  every  man  entereth  violently  into  it 

(ets  avrrjv  /3ia^erat),'  to  interpret  the  words  as  conveying 

approval  rather  than  condemnation ;   they  would  then 

refer  to  the  new  era  inaugurated  by  John's  preaching, 

under  which  the  blessings  of  the  Kingdom  were  opened 

to  all,  and  men  sought  with  eager  efforts  to  obtain  a 

share  in  them,  in  contrast  to  the  spirit  of  exclusiveness 

and  indifference  which  characterized  the  reign  of  scribal 

authority. 

The  call  of  John  penetrated  even  to  Galilee,  and  in  Jesus' 

answer  to  it,  Jesus  came  from  His  home  at  Nazareth  to  ?,aptls.m- 

'  Mark  1. 

receive  baptism.     St.  Luke  states  that  Jesus  appeared  9-11. 

after  John's  general  ministry  of  baptism  had  closed.  X^A m" 

We  are  not  told  what  previous  intercourse,  if  any,  had  Luke  iii. 

existed  between  John  and  Jesus.     St.  Matthew  relates  V,:2?',     . 

Cf.  Juhn  1. 

(but  apparently  not  from  the  Logia)  that  John  tried  29-34. 
to  hinder  Jesus  from  receiving  baptism  at  his  hands, 
saying  that  he  rather  needed  to  be  baptized  of  Him. 
Jesus,  however,  persisted,  on  the  ground  that  this 
apparent  reversal  of  their  true  relations  was  as  yet 
necessary  for  the  complete  fulfilment  of  the  Divine 
righteousness.  We  need  not  suppose  that  this  neces- 
sarily implies  that  either  Jesus  Himself  or  John  was 
as  yet  conscious  that  He  was  the  Messiah.     We  learn, 


58     OUTLINES  OF  THE  SYNOPTIC  RECORD 

indeed,  from  John's  own  words  in  the  Fourth  Gospel 
that  he  at  the  outset  of  his  preaching  had  not  known 
who  the  Messiah  should  be ;  but  that  it  had  been 
revealed  to  him  by  God  that  the  descent  of  the  Spirit 
should  be  ths  sign  whereby  he  should  be  able  to  recog- 
nize Him  when  He  appeared. 

The  question  may  be  asked,  Wiry  Jesus  consented  to 
submit  to  this  rite  at  the  hands  of  John,  and  what 
this  submission  involved  for  Him  ? 

The  importance  of  John's  baptism  was  not  neces- 
sarily the  same  for  Jesus  and  any  Israelite,  because 
both  submitted  to  it.  For  both  it  marked  a  change  from 
an  old  to  a  new  condition  of  life.  But  this  change  of 
condition  was  not  the  same  in  each  case.  To  the 
Israelite  the  old  life  was  defiled  by  sin,  and  the  change 
was  therefore  pre-eminently  to  a  new  state  of  righteous- 
ness. To  Jesus  the  old  condition  was  one  of  seclusion 
and  quietude,  but  not  of  sin ;  the  new  was  to  be  one  of 
public  work.  For  Him,  therefore,  the  change  was  from 
a  life  of  retirement  to  a  life  of  active  Messianic  work. 
Some  indeed  have  thought  that  by  undergoing  baptism 
Jesus,  though  Himself  without  sin,  was  identifying 
Himself  with  a  defiled  people,  and  thereby  showed 
Himself  a  true  Son  of  Israel. 

Again,  the  baptism  was  a  revelation  both  to  Jesus, 
the  baptized,  and  to  John,  the  baptizer.  To  Jesus  it 
did  not  necessarily  mean  that  He  became  for  the  first 
time  conscious  of  His  Messianic  calling ;  but  its  signifi- 
cance lay  in  the  fact  that,  as  we  have  said,  He  was  to 
enter  on  His  Messianic  work.  To  John  it  meant  that 
Jesus  was  no  longer  merely  an  Israelite  of  exceptionally 
pure  character,  who  had  no  sins  to  be  washed  away, 
but  was  the  Messiah  Himself.  That  this  double  revela- 
tion was  made  is  expressed  in  our  narratives  by  the 


THE  BAPTIST  59 

account  of  the  descent  of  the  Spirit  in  the  form  of  a 
dove,  and  of  the  voice  from  heaven :  both  were  signs 
alike  to  Jesus  and  John. 

It  is  clear  that  John  recognized  that  with  the  coming 
of  Jesus  his  own  mission  was  to  some  extent  ended. 

We  learn  from  the  Fourth  Gospel  something  of  the  Further 
subsequent  Messianic  teaching  of  John,  addressed  to  Messianic 
his  own  disciples.  He  was  baptizing  at  Bethany  on  the  of  the 
east  side  of  the  Jordan,  when  Jesus  again  appeared,  com-  Baptist, 
ing  probably  fresh  from  the  Temptation.  At  His  approach  29-34. 
the  Baptist  pointed  Him  out  to  his  disciples  with  the 
words,  '  Behold,  the  Lamb  of  God.'  This  expression, 
which  must  have  been  understood  to  connect  Him  with 
the  suffering  servant  of  Jehovah  in  the  second  part  of 
Isaiah,  or  possibly  with  the  Paschal  Lamb,  is  a  striking 
one  to  be  found  on  John's  lips.  Such  a  reference, 
whether  the  passage  in  Isaiah  was  among  the  Jews  at 
the  time  applied  Messianically  or  not,  introduced  an 
idea  entirely  out  of  keeping  with  the  popular  concep- 
tion of  the  Messiah,  since  it  associated  Him  with  the 
thought  of  suffering  and  rejection.  But  it  may  well 
have  been  borne  in  on  John's  mind,  as  he  considered 
the  reception  which  his  own  teaching  had  met,  that  the 
Messiah  too  would  have  to  encounter  opposition  and 
rejection  before  He  gained  His  Kingdom.  But  it  is  doubt- 
ful whether  John  identified  Jesus  with  the  suffering 
servant  of  Jehovah  in  all  details,  or  whether  he  laid 
stress  on  the  fact  that  the  Messiah  must  suffer.  In 
the  present  passage,  at  any  rate,  two  facts  are  empha- 
sized— (i)  the  lamb-like  character  of  Jesus,  (ii)  that  He 
was  destined  to  remove  from  Israel  the  burden  of  sin. 

It  may  be  well  here  to  follow  the  career  of  the  Baptist 
to  its  close. 

After  this  he  offended  Herod  Antipas  by  his   bold  Imprison- 


60     OUTLINES  OF  THE  SYNOPTIC  RECORD 


ment  of 
the  Bap- 
tist. 

Mark  vi. 
17-20. 
Matt,  xiv 
3-5. 

Luke  iii. 
19,  20. 


The  Bap- 
tist's 
Question. 
Matt.  xi. 
2-19. 
Luke  vii. 
18  35. 


denunciation  of  the  incestuous  marriage  which  he  had 
contracted  with  Herodias,  wife  of  his  brother  Herod 
Philip.  In  consequence  the  tetrarch  shut  him  up  in 
the  castle  of  Machaerus  by  the  Dead  Sea.  St.  Mark 
brings  out  vividly  the  miserable  vacillation  of  Herod, 
divided  between  the  influence  of  his  wife  and  the  awe 
which  the  moral  character  of  John  inspired  in  him. 

During  this  imprisonment  occurred  an  incident,  re- 
lated in  the  Logia,  which  gave  occasion  to  Jesus  to  bear 
testimony  to  the  work  of  His  forerunner  and  to  estimate 
its  results.  John  in  his  confinement  was  able  to  receive 
visits  from  his  disciples ;  and  through  them  he  learned 
that  Jesus  was  performing  '  the  works  of  the  Messiah 
(to.  cpya  tov  Xpio-rou).'  On  receipt  of  these  tidings  he 
sent  two  of  his  disciples  to  inquire  further  of  Jesus. 
We  can  only  conjecture  what  was  the  precise  motive 
which  prompted  his  question,  'Art  thou  He  that  cometh, 
or  look  we  for  another?'  It  seems,  at  any  rate,  to  imply 
some  doubt  in  the  mind  of  John  as  to  the  Messiah  ship 
of  Jesus.  Many  reasons  might  have  prompted  this 
doubt. 

(i)  The  complete  contrast  between  himself  and  his 
Successor  in  method  of  work  and  mode  of  life — a  con- 
trast even  greater  than  that  between  Elijah  and  Elisha. 
To  John  He  who,  so  far  from  living  a  strict  ascetic  life, 
sought  out  the  company  of  the  most  notorious  classes, 
may  have  seemed  even  to  make  light  of  sin.  Could 
this  be  the  Messiah  who  was  to  come  to  judgement, 
with  His  fan  in  His  hand?  (ii)  Jesus  had  never  yet 
acknowledged  Himself  to  be  the  Messiah,  and  had  even 
at  this  time  discouraged  the  hopes  which  the  people  had 
placed  in  Him.  (iii)  So  far  from  acknowledging  the 
work  of  His  predecessor  He  left  him  to  languish  in 
prison. 


THE  BAPTIST  61 

Jesus  answered  these  doubts  in  two  ways :  (i)  The 
direct  answer  given  to  the  disciples  of  John  was  an 
appeal  to  His  own  miracles,  which  were  shown  to 
coincide  with  prophecies  which  John,  at  any  rate,  would 
recognize  as  Messianic.  In  these  would  be  found  the 
best  satisfaction  of  the  doubts  of  John.  That  these 
doubts  were  real  seems  to  be  shown  by  the  significant 
warning  which  Jesus  appends  :  '  Blessed  is  he,  whosoever 
shall  find  none  occasion  of  stumbling  in  Me.' 

(ii)  The  indirect  answer  given  to  the  people  consisted 
in  a  justification  of  the  contrast  between  Himself  and 
John.  He  first  laid  stress  on  the  true  prophetic  cha- 
racter of  the  mission  of  John.  What  had  they  gone 
out  into  the  wilderness  to  see?  No  teacher  tossed 
about  like  a  reed  by  the  gusts  of  popular  opinion  ;  no 
courtier  living  a  voluptuous  life  of  ease ;  no,  rather  a 
true  successor  of  the  Old  Testament  prophets.  But 
John  was  even  greater  than  his  predecessors  :  he  was 
indeed  the  messenger  foretold  by  Malachi ;  none  greater 
than  he  had  arisen  among  the  sons  of  men,  yet  even 
the  humblest  among  those  who,  by  following  Jesus, 
had  become  sharers  in  the  new  era  of  the  Messianic 
Kingdom  occupied  a  higher  position  in  the  religious 
order  than  did  John.  With  him  the  old  dispensation 
ended,  '  all  the  prophets  and  the  law  prophesied  until 
John ' :  with  Jesus  the  new  dispensation  began.  He 
then  refers  to  the  reception  accorded  to  John  by  dif- 
ferent classes.  Finally  He  contrasts  the  effect  produced 
on  the  common  people  and  the  publicans  by  John's 
preaching,  and  on  the  Pharisees  and  Sadducees.  The 
former,  by  submitting  to  the  baptism  of  John,  admitted 
the  righteousness  of  the  Divine  claims  made  upon  them, 
while  the  latter  had  refused  John's  baptism,  and  so  set 
at  nought  the  counsel  of  God. 


62     OUTLINES  OF  THE  SYNOPTIC  RECORD 

Parable  of      ft   seems   not   unlikely   that   on    this   occasion   was 
Sons.  spoken   the   Parable    of    the   Two   Sons.      It   is    most 

Matt  xxi.  appropriate  here,  since  it  illustrates  the  same  subject 
of  the  real  religious  state  of  the  two  contrasted  classes 
of  the  nation,  as  it  was  revealed  by  their  treatment  of 
John.  This  parable  is  only  preserved  by  St.  Matthew, 
possibly  from  the  Logia :  he  places  it  in  the  group  of 
parables  spoken  in  the  temple  courts  during  the  last 
week  of  the  ministry,  connecting  it  with  the  answer 
given  by  Jesus  to  the  question  of  the  Scribes  as 
to  His  Messianic  authority :  in  which  He  also  referred 
to  their  treatment  of  the  claims  of  John.  Thus  of 
the  two  sons,  the  first,  who  promised  to  go  and  then 
went  not,  represents  the  hierarchy,  while  the  son  who, 
having  refused,  repented  and  went,  stands  for  the  class 
of  'publicans  and  harlots.'  St.  Matthew  appends  to 
the  parable  a  comment  of  Jesus  which  states  distinctly 
this  application  of  it. 

Jesus  ends  by  passing  a  verdict  on  that  generation 
generally  for  their  attitude  alike  to  Himself  and  to  John. 
They  are,  He  says,  to  be  compared  to  peevish  intract- 
able children  at  their  play  in  the  market-place,  always 
insisting  on  their  own  way,  suggesting  to  play  first  at 
marriages,  then  at  funerals,  in  each  case  choosing  what 
is  distasteful  to  the  mood  of  their  playmates  at  the  time. 
Such  was  the  conduct  of  the  men  of  that  day :  when 
John  came,  leading  a  stern  ascetic  life,  they  called 
him  mad,  '  he  hath  a  devil ' ;  yet  when  the  Son  of  Man 
came,  sharing  in  the  social  joys  of  men,  they  reproached 
Him  with  moral  laxity  :  '  Behold,  a  gluttonous  man,  and 
a  winebibber,  a  friend  of  publicans  and  sinners.'  Yet 
even  so  there  was  a  minority,  consisting  of  those  same 
publicans  and  sinners,  who  had  accepted  the  preaching 
of   John;    and    these    had   shown    themselves   thereby 


THE  BAPTIST  63 

true  children  of  the  Divine  wisdom,  and  vindicated  her 
methods  of  dealing  through  John  and  Jesus  alike : 
'  Wisdom  is  justified  of  all  her  children.' 

Soon  after  this  followed  the  murder  of  the  Baptist.  Death  of 
The  circumstances  are  fully  related  by  both  St.  Matthew  j*®  BaP" 
and  St.   Mark.     Both  introduce  the  account  of  it  in  Mark  vi. 
connexion  with  the  superstitious  fears  which  the  news  ~  ~ .    •  . 
of  the  activity  of  Jesus  had  aroused  in  the  mind  of  6-12. 
Herod    that   John    had   returned    to   life.     That   both 
should   thus   insert   this  narrative   out   of   its   natural 
position  is  an  additional  proof  that  the  two  accounts 
are  not  independent. 

Even  in  his  prison  John  was  pursued  by  the 
relentless  hatred  of  Herodias,  and  was  only  preserved 
from  her  by  Herod,  owing  to  the  awe  which  he  inspired 
in  him.  Soon,  however,  a  convenient  opportunity  was 
presented  to  Herodias  to  satisfy  her  vengeance.  Herod 
made  a  great  feast  to  celebrate  his  birthday,  probably 
in  the  castle  of  Machaerus  where  John  lay.  Herodias 
allowed  her  own  daughter  to  go  in  and  dance  before  the 
guests ;  so  pleased  was  Herod  with  her  performance 
that  he  swore  to  give  her  any  boon  that  she  should  ask. 
Herodias  seized  her  opportunity,  and  in  reply  to  the 
girl's  question,  '  What  am  I  to  ask  for  myself  ? '  an- 
swered, '  The  head  of  John  the  Baptist.'  Herod  thus 
found  himself  completely  entrapped.  Grieved  as  he 
was,  he  had  not  the  courage  to  refuse ;  a  soldier  was  at 
once  dispatched,  and  returned  bearing  the  head  of  the 
murdered  prophet  to  the  damsel,  who  gave  it  to  her 
mother. 

We  may  notice  two  ways  in  which  the  effects  of  The  Re- 
John's  work  of  preparation  were  seen  throughout  the  jul*s  ,0l: 
ministry  of  Jesus.  Work. 

(i)  John's  preaching  aroused  in  men's  minds  an  eager 


64     OUTLINES  OF  THE  SYNOPTIC  RECORD 

expectation  of  the  immediate  approach  of  the  Messianic 
Kingdom,  and  so  gave  birth  to  the  enthusiastic,  though 
mistaken,  hopes  which  the  ministry  of  Jesus  aroused 
at  its  outset  in  the  hearts  of  the  people  generally.  The 
cause  of  the  subsequent  rejection  of  Jesus  was  due  to 
the  mistaken  character  of  the  prevalent  Messianic 
conception. 

(ii)  But  John  in  another  and  more  effectual  way 
prepared  the  way  for  his  Successor.  From  the  circle  of 
John's  disciples  Jesus  drew  the  first  nucleus  of  His 
own  band  of  followers.  Under  John,  therefore,  they 
received  the  training  which  prepared  them  to  accept 
the  call  of  Jesus.  The  Messianic  teaching  of  John 
had,  as  it  were,  broken  up  the  soil  of  their  minds,  so 
that  it  was  ready  to  receive,  and  bring  to  production 
the  seed,  when  it  was  sown  by  Jesus. 


CHAPTER    III 

THE  TEMPTATION  AND  EARLY  MINISTRY 
IN  JUDAEA 

The  Temptation.  —First  Call  of  Disciples. — The  First  Passover. — 
Cleansing  of  Temple.  —  Stay  in  Judaea.  —  Return  to 
Galilee  through  Samaria. 

Mark  i.  12,  13,  xi.  15-18;  Matthew  iv.  1-11,  xxi. 
12,  13;  Luke  iv.  1-13,  xix.  45,  46  ;  John  i.  35-51, 
ii,  iii.  1-5,  22-24,  iv.  1-42. 

All  the  Synoptic  Gospels  connect   the  baptism  'of  TheTemp- 
Jesus  closely  with  the  Temptation.     Under  the  direct  !ftl?n:  JO 
influence  of  that   Spirit  which  had  been  then  poured  13. 
upon   Him,   Jesus  withdrew  into   the   solitude  of   the  J1**** 1V- 
wilderness.      It   was    only   natural    that,    having    just  Luke  i v. 
received  through  the  Divine  voice  the  clear  assurance  of 
His  Messianic  calling,  Jesus  should  thus  seek  a  period 
of  solitary  retirement  in  view  of  the  work  which  opened 
before  Him. 

Two  accounts  of  the  Temptation  are  preserved  in  the 
Gospel  records.  The  Marcan  source  narrated  the  simple 
fact  of  the  forty  days'  sojourn  of  Jesus  in  the  wilderness 
and  of  His  exposure  to  temptation  during  that  time. 
The  fuller  account  of  St.  Matthew  and  St.  Luke,  drawn 
probably  from  the  Logia,  describes  the  three  different 
forms  which  the  Temptation  assumed.    It  would  appear 

F 


6G     OUTLINES  OF  THE  SYNOPTIC  RECORD 

that  the  narrative  of  the  Temptation  must  have  been 
derived  originally  from  Jesus  Himself ;  and  our  Gospels 
seem  to  preserve  the  account  as  it  was  given  to  His 
disciples  by  His  own  lips.  It  may  be  possible  in  some 
details  of  the  narrative  to  trace  the  influence  of  similar 
incidents  in  the  Old  Testament.  Thus  the  period  of 
forty  days  of  retirement,  fasting,  and  temptation,  would 
naturally  be  connected  with  similar  periods,  such  as  the 
forty  days  during  which  Moses  was  in  solitary  com- 
munion with  God  on  the  Mount,  the  forty  days'  fast  of 
Elijah,  and  the  forty  years  wandering  of  Israel  in  the 
wilderness;  the  last  period  being  marked  by  their 
tempting  of  Jehovah.  Again,  the  ministry  of  angels 
would  recall  the  saying  of  the  Psalmist  as  to  the  manna, 
that  '  man  did  eat  angels'  food ' ;  also  that  Elijah  after 
his  fast  had  been  miraculously  fed  by  angels. 

Now  when  we  come  to  consider  the  meaning  and 
purpose  of  the  Temptation,  we  shall  see  that  the  narra- 
tive explains  in  a  pictorial  form  certain  underlying 
principles  of  the  life  of  Jesus. 

In  the  first  place  it  has  a  direct  bearing  on  the  con- 
ditions under  which  He  was  to  carry  out  His  Messianic 
work.  Thus  two  of  the  temptations  are  introduced  by 
the  challenge,  '  If  Thou  be  the  Son  of  God,'  with  an 
evident  reference  to  the  voice  at  the  baptism ;  here  it 
is  probable  that  the  term  '  Son  of  God '  means  primarily, 
at  any  rate,  '  the  Messiah  '  ;  while  the  third  temptation 
has  an  evident  reference  to  the  expectation  of  a  world- 
wide kingdom  of  the  Messiah.  Secondly,  each  tempta- 
tion is  concerned  with  the  use  to  be  made  by  Jesus  of 
His  supernatural  powers. 

A  little  consideration  will  show  that  we  have  here 
represented  the  three  different  aspects  under  which 
temptation  presented  itself  to  Jesus  in  the  carrying  out 


TEMPTATION  AND  MINISTRY  IN  JUDAEA   67 

of  His  work.  Yet  the  narrative  is  with  good  reason 
placed  before  the  outset  of  His  public  ministry,  for  it 
would  naturally  be  just  in  this  period  of  retirement  and 
preparation  that  He  would  lay  down  for  Himself  His 
future  principles  of  action,  and  the  methods  to  be  adopted 
in  setting  forth  His  Messianic  claims.  That  struggle  in 
the  solitude  of  the  wilderness  was  therefore  crucial  for 
His  future  work.  Keeping  this  in  view,  we  can  con- 
jecture to  some  extent,  at  any  rate,  the  general  nature 
of  each  temptation. 

(i)  In  the  first  Satan  is  represented  as  suggesting  that 
Jesus  should  assuage  the  pangs  of  hunger  by  turning 
stones  into  bread.  Jesus  replies  by  quoting  from 
Deuteronomy  the  words  spoken  in  reference  to  the 
manna  :  '  Man  shall  not  live  by  bread  alone,  but  by  Deut.  viii. 
every  word  that  proceedeth  out  of  the  mouth  of  God.'  3- 
Here  the  suggestion  seems  to  be  that  Jesus,  as  Messiah, 
might  claim  exemption  from  physical  suffering  and 
privation  ;  and  thus  that  He  might  use  the  supernatural 
powers  entrusted  to  Him  for  the  relief  of  His  own 
personal  wants.  The  tempter  urges,  '  You  are  the 
Messiah,  the  Son  of  God  ;  surely  then  you  may  look 
to  God  to  relieve  your  hunger :  at  your  command  these 
stones  can  be  turned  to  bread  for  your  support.'  By 
the  quotation  from  Deuteronomy  Jesus  showed  that, 
though  the  '  Son  of  God,'  He  was  subject  to  the  outward 
conditions  of  man's  life ;  and  therefore  that,  as  man,  He 
could  only  act  in  accordance  with  God's  will.  He,  like 
other  men,  was  to  be  dependent  upon  God  for  the 
supply  of  His  bodily  needs.  He  could  not  put  God  to 
the  test  by  trying  to  relieve  these  by  a  miracle  on  His 
own  behalf.  His  food  was  in  the  carrying  out  of  God's 
will :  '  My  meat  is  to  do  the  will  of  Him  that  sent  Me  ' 
(John  iv.  34).     We  see   how  entirely  throughout   the 

F2 


68     OUTLINES  OF  THE  SYNOPTIC  RECORD 

ministry  Jesus  recognized  this  condition  of  His  Messianic 
work.  Mention  is  from  time  to  time  made  of  His  being 
tired  or  hungry.  He  miraculously  multiplied  food  to 
Telieve  the  needs  of  the  multitude,  but  He  Himself 
sought  to  satisfy  His  hunger  by  ordinary  means,  as 
shown  in  the  incident  of  the  fig-tree.  This  submission 
to  the  necessity  of  physical  suffering  stands  out  most 
clearly  in  the  account  of  the  Passion.  The  cry  '  I  thirst ' 
declared  how  entirely  He  had  accepted  this  condition  of 
His  work  as  Messiah. 

(ii)  St.  Matthew  places  second  the  temptation  on  the 
pinnacle  of  the  temple,  which  stands  third  in  St.  Luke. 
Whatever  is  meant  by  '  the  pinnacle  of  the  temple,'  it 
must  doubtless  have  been  some  well-known  point.  The 
suggestion,  therefore,  is  that  Jesus  should  produce  an 
impression  by  casting  Himself  down  from  this  into  the 
temple  courts  below,  in  the  sight  of  the  assembled 
people.  The  temptation  then  would  be  that  Jesus 
should  prove  that  He  was  the  Messiah  by  some  dramatic 
and  startling  act,  which  should  impress  men's  minds,  so 
as  to  remove  all  possible  doubts  as  to  His  Person. 
There  was  a  prevalent  expectation  that  the  appearance 
of  the  Messiah  should  be  dramatic  and  unexpected 
(John  vii.  27  :  '  When  the  Christ  cometh,  no  one  knoweth 
whence  He  is').  Once  more  we  recognize  a  fixed  prin- 
ciple observed  by  Jesus  in  the  presentation  of  His 
Messianic  claims.  He  would  do  no  miracle  for  its  own 
sake,  or  with  a  view  to  mere  effect.  It  was  not  by 
'  signs  and  wonders '  that  true  faith  in  His  Person  could 
be  aroused.  He  consistently  refused  to  accede  to  the 
repeated  demand  made  to  Him  to  show  some  arbitrary 
and  uncalled-for  sign  in  vindication  of  His  own  claims. 
This  principle  explains  His  attitude  throughout  the 
Passion :   for  it  was  this  same  temptation  which  found 


TEMPTATION  AND  MINISTRY  IN  JUDAEA  69 

expression  in  the  challenge  addressed  to  Him  at  the 
crucifixion,  '  If  Thou  be  the  Christ,  come  down  from 
the  cross.'  How  dramatic  would  the  effect  have  been 
if  Jesus,  at  the  very  moment  of  apparent  defeat,  had 
proved  His  claims  by  descending  from  the  cross  and 
spreading  confusion  among  His  enemies !  Yet  such 
a  course  of  action  would  have  been  a  complete  violation 
of  this  guiding  principle  of  His  ministry.  He  would  not 
force  belief  in  Him  on  men  by  any  miraculous  display  of 
power. 

(hi)  In  the  third  temptation  Satan  offers  to  give  Jesus 
all  the  kingdoms  of  the  Roman  world  (7-775  olKovfxivrjs),  if 
He  will  fall  down  and  worship  him.  This  suggestion 
must  be  that  He  should  seek  immediate  success  in 
establishing  His  Messianic  Kingdom ;  and  should  do  so 
by  adopting  a  course  of  action  in  opposition  to  the 
Divine  will.  Now  this  He  would  have  done  had  He 
sacrificed  the  spiritual  character  of  His  Messianic  King- 
dom in  deference  to  the  materialistic  expectations  of 
His  contemporaries.  As  we  study  the  history  of  the 
ministry,  we  cannot  fail  to  realize  that  such  a  temptation 
must  always  have  been  at  hand.  We  are  told  of  the 
popular  enthusiasm  raised  throughout  Galilee  by  the 
early  ministry  of  Jesus.  There  can  be  no  doubt  that 
had  He  consented  to  fall  in  with  prevalent  Messianic 
ideas,  He  would  have  gained  immediate  acceptance. 
Yet  to  the  last  He  insisted  on  maintaining  the  entirely 
spiritual  character  of  His  Kingdom.  He  would  make  no 
open  proclamation  of  Messiahship.  When  the  enthu- 
siasm reached  its  height  after  the  miracle  of  feeding  and 
the  people  would  have  made  Him  a  king  by  force,  He 
withdrew  Himself,  and  forced  His  disciples  to  cross  the 
lake  out  of  the  reach  of  contagion  with  the  popular 
excitement.     He  continued  to  adhere  unswervingly  to 


70     OUTLINES  OF  THE  SYNOPTIC  RECORD 

this  spiritual  character  of  His  claims,  even  when  He 
saw  that  such  a  course  must  lead  to  certain  rejection 
and  death.  When  Peter  sought  to  dissuade  Him  from 
this  course,  He  showed  by  His  rebuke  that  He  recognized 
in  the  suggestion  a  repetition  of  the  Temptation  on  the 
Mount.  The  final  catastrophe  was  the  direct  result  of 
His  disappointment  of  the  popular  hopes.  The  hierarchy 
accused  Him  before  Pilate  of  making  Himself  King  of 
the  Jews ;  the  real  cause  of  His  death  was,  indeed,  that 
He  refused  to  come  forward  as  such — at  least  in  the 
sense  which  the  Jewish  nation  attributed  to  the  term. 
It  was  this  principle  which  He  asserted  before  Pilate  : 
'  My  kingdom  is  not  of  this  world :  if  My  kingdom 
were  of  this  world,  then  would  My  servants  fight.' 
First  Call  It  appears  from  the  Fourth  Gospel  that  after  His 
of  Earliest  sojourn  in  the  wilderness  Jesus  returned  to  the  banks 

.Disciples. 

Job  n  i.  of  the  Jordan.  Here  He  attracted  to  Him  the  first 
35-51.  small  nucleus  of  followers,  though  He  did  not  as  yet 
form  a  regularly  constituted  band  of  disciples,  such  as 
had  gathered  round  John.  The  first  to  join  Jesus, 
John  and  Andrew,  were  themselves  disciples  of  John 
the  Baptist,  and  attached  themselves  to  the  new  teacher 
in  consequence  of  John's  testimony.  Andrew  summoned 
his  brother  Simon  to  Jesus,  and  the  narrative  seems  to 
imply  that  John  too,  then  or  subsequently,  brought  his 
brother  James.  Before  the  return  to  Galilee,  two  more 
were  added  to  the  number,  Philip  of  Bethsaida,  a  fellow 
townsman  of  Andrew  and  Peter,  and  Nathanael  of  Cana 
in  Galilee.  It  is  possible  that  all  these  had  some 
previous  acquaintance  with  Jesus;  while  James  and 
John  were  apparently  His  first  cousins,  since  a  com- 
parison of  Matt,  xxvii.  56  with  John  xix.  25  seems  to 
prove  that  their  mother  Salome  was  a  sister  of  the 
Virgin  Mary. 


TEMPTATION  AND  MINISTRY  IN  JUDAEA  71 

Here  we  must  pause  to  consider  what  were  the  ideas 
as  to  our  Lord's  Person,  which  led  these  first  followers 
to  attach  themselves  to  Him. 

The  Fourth  Gospel  clearly  states  that  they  joined  Him 
in  the  belief  that  He  was  the  Messiah;  and,  in  fact, 
it  was  almost  inevitable  that  they  should  thus  regard 
Him,  for  the  preaching  of  John  had  raised  the 
fervour  of  Messianic  expectation  to  its  highest  pitch. 
Doubtless  these  men  had  joined  John  with  the  ex- 
pectation that  he  might  prove  to  be  the  Messiah. 
And  John  himself  had  now  pointed  them  to  Jesus, 
as  the  greater  One  whose  coming  he  had  foretold.  Had 
it  not  been  so,  they  would  never  have  left  their 
old  master.  Thus  Andrew  sought  out  Peter  with 
the  tidings,  *  We  have  found  the  Messiah';  Philip  John  i.  41. 
declared  to  Nathanael,  '  We  have  found  Him,  of  whom  John  i.  45. 
Moses  in  the  law,  and  the  prophets,  did  write ' ;  while 
Nathanael  himself,  when  his  doubts  were  removed,  ex- 
claimed, '  Rabbi,  Thou  art  the  Son  of  God ;  Thou  art  John  i.  <L9. 
King  of  Israel.'  Yet  these  expressions  must  not  be 
regarded  as  indicating,  in  the  minds  of  the  disciples, 
a  settled  conviction  of  the  Messiahship  of  Jesus.  They 
reveal  rather  the  enthusiasm  of  expectation  with  which 
they  first  joined  Him.  But  we  notice  that  Jesus  Him- 
self never  in  any  way  encouraged  them  by  putting 
forward  at  that  time  any  Messianic  claim.  When 
Nathanael  greeted  Him  as  '  the  Son  of  God,'  He  tacitly 
substituted  for  it  the  term  'Son  of  Man.'  And  it  is 
soon  apparent  that  what  held  the  disciples  to  Him  was  the 
bond  of  personal  attachment  to  a  teacher.  The  settled 
conviction  that  Jesus  was  the  Messiah  they  could  only 
attain  later,  after  a  long  period  of  association  with  Him. 

With  this  small  company  of  followers  Jesus  now 
returned  to  Galilee. 


72     OUTLINES  OF  THE  SYNOPTIC  RECORD 

First  The  first  miracle,  performed  at  Cana,  of  changing  the 

a/cTna      water  mto  wme  belongs  rather  to  the  home  life,  and  falls 
John  ii.      outside  the  history  of  the  public  ministry. 
~    '  Jesus    after    this,    together    with    His    mother,   His 

Cxper-        brethren,  and   His   disciples,    took   up   His   abode   for 
iiaum.        a  time  at  Capernaum  on  the  western  shore  of  the  lake. 
w'  Probably  the  move  from  Nazareth  was  made  because 
Capernaum  afforded  a  more  convenient  centre  for  His 
future  ministry  by  the  lake. 
First  Pass-      But  it  was  at  Jerusalem,   and  not  in  Galilee,  that 
Cleansing  Jesus  made  His  first  public  appearance.     The  occasion 
of  the         of  His  going  up  was  the  Feast  of  the  Passover.     While 
Johifii       *n  Jerusalem>  He  came  forward  to  enter  a  striking  pro- 
13-22.        test   against    the    desecration    of    the    temple    courts. 
15-18.X1'     There  had  grown  up  a  practice  of  buying  and  selling, 
Matt.  xxi.  in  the  Court  of  the  Gentiles,  the  animals  required  for 
Luke  xix    sa,GT^CG  >  while  the  money-changers  drove  a  trade  by 
,45,  46.        changing  the  money  of  the  Jews  from  foreign  parts  into 
the  half -shekel   required  for   the    temple   tax.      Jesus 
adopted  a  strong  measure  to  protest  against  this  viola- 
tion of  the  sanctity  of  His  Father's  house.      Entering 
in  He  expelled  the  buyers  and  sellers,  driving  out  their 
beasts  with  a  scourge  of  cords,  and  overthrew  the  tables 
of  the  money-changers,  scattering  their  coins.    Such  deal- 
ings He  declared  to  be  making  His  Father's  house  •  a 
house  of  merchandise.' 

Now  a  similar  act  of  Jesus  was  preserved  in  the 
Marcan  tradition,  and  is  recorded  in  all  the  Synoptic 
Gospels ;  only  they  place  it  on  the  occasion  of  the  last 
Passover  of  the  ministry,  and  in  the  week  of  the  Passion. 
The  question  naturally  arises  whether  they  refer  to  the 
same  incident  as  that  related  in  the  Fourth  Gospel. 
There  are,  indeed,  considerable  divergences  in  the  two 
accounts.    Thus  the  Synoptists  state  that  Jesus  referred 


TEMPTATION  AND  MINISTRY  IN  JUDAEA   73 

to  the  prophecy  of  Isaiah,  'My  house  shall  be  called  isa.  lvi.  7. 
a  house  of  prayer  for  all  the  nations.'  This  was  par- 
ticularly applicable  to  the  Court  of  the  Gentiles ;  for 
thither  strangers  from  all  parts  of  the  world  came  up, 
their  object  being  not  to  offer  sacrifice,  but  to  pray 
to  the  God  of  Israel.  Such  devotions  must  be  inter- 
rupted by  the  din  of  this  temple  traffic.  But  Jesus 
further  declared  that,  like  the  worldly  and  dishonest 
priests  rebuked  by  Jeremiah,  they  were  making  God's  Jer.vii.  11. 
house  into  'a  den  of  robbers.'  These  quotations  are 
not  mentioned  by  St.  John ;  but  he  alone  refers  to  the 
scourge  of  cords. 

The  repetition  of  the  act  is  not  impossible  ;  the  pro- 
test of  Jesus  might  possibly  have  had  only  a  temporary 
effect,  and  the  same  abuses  might  have  crept  in  between 
the  first  and  last  Passover.  But  yet  it  is  hard  to  believe 
that  this  was  really  the  case.  As  we  compare  the  two 
accounts,  we  are  struck  by  the  close  resemblance  of  the 
whole  scene  as  each  describes  it.  It  is  obvious,  too, 
that  such  a  protest  loses  much  of  its  impressiveness 
if  it  be  repeated.  Again,  if  there  were  two  incidents,  it  is 
curious  that  each  of  our  two  authorities  should  select 
a  different  one,  and  give  no  hint  that  they  knew  of 
the  existence  of  the  other.  In  the  earliest  Christian 
harmony  of  the  Gospels,  the  Diatessaron  of  Tatian  (circa 
a.d.  150),  the  two  incidents  are  identified. 

But  if  we  consider  that  there  was  only  one  cleansing, 
we  have  to  decide  between  the  position  assigned  by  the 
Synoptists  and  that  of  the  Fourth  Gospel. 

Now  if  the  act  occurred  at  the  last  Passover  as  stated 
by  the  Synoptists,  it  is  hard  to  conceive  why  the  fourth 
Evangelist  deliberately  removed  it  from  that  position. 
On  the  other  hand,  the  Marcan  tradition,  which  related 
only  the  last  visit  to  Jerusalem,  had  to  place  the  incident 


74     OUTLINES  OF  THE  SYNOPTIC  RECORD 

at  that  visit,  if  it  was  to  be  included  at  all.  The 
Synoptists  appear  in  other  cases  to  have  massed  together 
incidents  which  occurred  during  the  previous  visits  in 
the  course  of  the  ministry. 

The  action  did  not  in  itself  involve  any  direct  claim 
of  Messianic  authority,  since  it  was  one  that  might 
be  performed  by  any  Jewish  teacher,  jealous  for  the 
sanctity  of  the  temple.  Jesus  was  merely  carrying  out 
a  duty  which  had  been  neglected  by  the  hierarchy, 
to  whom  the  regulation  of  the  temple  worship  properly 
belonged,  but  who  had  refused  to  interfere,  since  the 
traffic  was  a  source  of  profit  to  themselves.  At  the 
same  time  such  an  act  would  necessarily  lead  men  to 
regard  Him  as  claiming  to  be  a  national  reformer, 
zealous  for  the  honour  of  Jehovah,  and  bearing  a  Divine 
commission.  The  attitude  and  words  of  Jesus  through- 
out the  incident  are  alike  entirely  in  accordance  with 
the  spirit  of  the  old  prophets ;  in  fact  such  a  public 
protest  was  in  the  strictest  sense  a  prophetic  act. 
Naturally  the  religious  leaders  did  not  allow  such  an 
act  to  pass  unchallenged.  They  demanded  of  Jesus  on 
what  credentials  He  based  His  claim  to  carry  out  such 
a  reform  :  '  What  sign  showest  Thou  unto  us,  seeing  that 
Thou  doest  these  things  ? '  Jesus  replied  with  the  enig- 
matical saying, '  Destroy  this  temple,  and  in  three  days  I 
will  raise  it  up.'  The  words  would  be  understood  to  refer 
to  the  proverbial  saying  of  Hosea  (Hosea  vi.  2) ;  St.  John 
in  the  light  of  later  events  interpreted  the  words  of 
'the  temple  of  His  body.'  It  is,  however,  unlikely 
that  the  saying,  in  its  original  sense,  was  intended  as 
a  prediction  of  the  death  and  resurrection  of  Jesus. 
Possibly,  however,  this  is  not  the  reference  intended 
even  by  St.  John.  The  term  'His  body'  may  apply 
to  His  body  '  the  Church,'  the  new  Israel,  which  should 


TEMPTATION  AND  MINISTRY  IN  JUDAEA   75 

be  raised  on  the  ruins  of  the  old.  In  that  case 
Jesus  half  ironically  bids  them  'Destroy  this  temple,' 
i.  e.  '  complete  the  overthrow  of  the  temple  worship 
which  must  follow  from  such  gross  desecration  as  you 
are  permitting  ;  and  in  three  days '  (a  proverbial  saying 
for  the  shortest  possible  space  of  time)  'I  will  raise 
it  up  by  reviving  the  old  worship  in  a  purer  form,  i.  e. 
in  the  Christian  Church.'  It  was  doubtless  a  perversion 
of  this  saying  which  formed  the  ground  of  accusation 
at  the  trial  of  Jesus.  At  that  time  the  recollection  of 
the  saying  appears  to  have  been  indistinct,  as  it  was 
found  difficult  to  get  two  witnesses  to  agree  as  to  the 
exact  words.  This  would  be  only  natural  if  two  years 
had  intervened,  and  not  only  four  days,  as  would  be 
the  case  if  we  adopted  the  Synoptic  placing  of  the 
incident.  The  Jews  in  answer,  taking  the  saying  quite 
literally,  reminded  Him  that  forty-six  years  had  been 
required  for  the  construction  of  the  temple.  This  may 
allude  to  the  time  during  which  the  temple  of  Herod 
the  Great  had  been  in  building,  having  been  begun 
B.C.  19-20.  As,  however,  this  interpretation  is  open 
to  question  on  grammatical  grounds,  others  refer  it  to 
the  temple  of  Zerubbabel,  which  was  estimated  to  have 
taken  forty-six  years  in  building.  The  Jews  would 
naturally  rather  connect  the  sacred  building  with  Zerub- 
babel than  with  Idumean  Herod. 

St.  John  mentions  that,  during  this  Passover,  a  large  Nicode- 
number  of  professing  adherents,  attracted  by  the  miracles,  1™S-  .. 
attached  themselves  to  Jesus.     He  also  gives  an  outline  23-iii.  5. 
of  a  conversation  of  Jesus  with  Nicodemus,  a  member 
of  the  Sanhedrin,  who  came  to  Him  by  night.  g.      in 

Then  followed  the  stay  in  Judaea,  to  which  reference  Judaea, 
has   been    made,   during  which    Jesus'    disciples   were  J0*^ 1V* 
baptizing    side    by    side    with    John.     This    baptism  iii.  22-24. 


76     OUTLINES  OF  THE  SYNOPTIC  RECORD 


Return  to 

Galilee 

through 

Samaria. 

John  iv. 

3-42. 


seems  to  have  been  a  continuation  of  that  of  John, 
though  it  may  have  prepared  the  minds  of  the  disciples 
for  the  institution  of  the  Christian  Sacrament. 

Finding,  however,  that  the  Pharisees  were  inclined  to 
stir  up  a  spirit  of  rivalry  between  His  own  disciples  and 
those  of  John,  Jesus  left  Judaea  and  returned  to 
Galilee.  To  reach  it,  He  had  to  pass  through  Samaria, 
unless  He  would  make  a  long  detour.  The  Fourth  Gospel 
relates  a  conversation  which  occurred  during  this  journey 
between  Jesus  and  a  woman  of  the  country  beside 
Jacob's  well  at  Sychar.  The  incident  itself  lies  beyond 
our  scope.  Yet  we  notice  that  in  the  course  of  the 
conversation  Jesus  is  recorded  to  have  made  the  first 
explicit  announcement  of  His  Messiahship  when  in 
answer  to  the  woman's  words  (verses  25,  26),  'I  know  that 
Messiah  cometh,'  Jesus  replied,  '  I  that  speak  unto  thee 
am  He.'  Elsewhere  no  such  clear  declaration  was 
made  by  Jesus  even  to  the  disciples  till  long  after ;  but 
the  circumstances  of  Samaria  were  exceptional.  There 
Jesus  intended  to  make  but  a  passing  stay ;  so  that 
there  was  no  risk  of  a  popular  rising  in  His  favour.  In 
Samaria,  too,  the  Messianic  belief  was  free  from  the 
materialistic  conceptions  which  in  Galilee  and  Judaea 
rendered  any  open  assumption  of  the  position  premature. 
The  tidings  of  the  woman  produced  a  large  accession 
of  converts  from  the  city.  It  was  not,  however,  the 
intention  of  Jesus  to  make  Samaria  a  centre  of  mis- 
sionary activity  ;  so  that  from  Sychar  He  continued  His 
journey  to  Galilee. 


CHAPTER    IV 

OPENING  OF  GALILEAN  MINISTRY 

Return  to  Galilee. — Healings  of  Nobleman's  Son  and  Centurion's 
Servant. — Final  Call  of  First  Disciples.— Jesus  at  Caper- 
naum.—  Healings  of  Peter's  Wife's  Mother  and  other 
Sick. — Preaching  in  Galilee. — The  Leper. 

Mark  i.  14-45;  Matthew  iv.  12-25,  viii.  1-10,  13-17; 
Luke  iv.  14,  15,  31-44,  v.  1-16,  vii.  1-10. 

Jesus  now  entered  Galilee  and  there  opened  His  public  Jesus' 

ministry.    The  reception  with  which  He  had  met  during  5e[-jrn  to 

His  brief  stay  in  Judaea  had  clearly  shown  Him  that  Mark  i. 

the  character  and   temper  of  its  inhabitants  rendered  H\}5: 
^  Matt.  iv. 

the  metropolis  unsuitable  to  form  the  main  scene  of  12-17. 
His  activity.  But  it  must  not  be  thought  that  the  ^)lk®  1V' 
visit  to  Judaea  had  been  entirely  barren  of  result.  He 
now  appeared  in  Galilee  as  no  unknown  teacher.  The 
fame  of  His  miracles  performed  at  Jerusalem  had  pre- 
ceded Him,  carried  by  those  who  had  gone  as  pilgrims 
to  the  Passover,  and  this  secured  for  Him  a  ready 
welcome. 

His  second  miracle  in  Galilee,  related  in  the  Fourth  Healing  of 
Gospel,  was   again   performed  at  Cana ;    this  was  the  Nobl,e- 
healing  of  the  son  of   a  courtier,  probably  of   Herod  Son. 
Antipas,  who  was  lying  sick  at  Capernaum.  4fih54.1V' 

The  First  and  Third  Gospels  contain  an  account  of  Healing 

a  miracle  similar  to  this,  which  is  placed  in  the  former  °!  cf n*u~ 

r  rion  s  Ser- 

immediately  after  the  Sermon  on  the  Mount.     St.  Luke  vant. 


78     OUTLINES  OF  THE  SYNOPTIC  RECORD 

Matt.  viii.  gives  the  narrative  with  additional  details,  probably 
Luk*'  *"  drawn  from  an  independent  source.  In  this  case  the 
1-10.  miracle  is  performed  at  Capernaum,  and  the  suppliant 

is  a  Roman  centurion.  The  sufferer  for  whom  he  prays 
is  called  his  slave  (SovXos)  by  St.  Luke,  his  servant  or 
son  (ttcus)  by  St.  Matthew,  a  term  which  also  occurs 
in  St.  Luke's  account.  He  is  said  by  St.  Matthew  to 
be  suffering  from  paralysis  and  in  great  pain.  St.  Luke 
tells  that,  fearing  lest  Jesus  should  refuse  to  accede 
to  the  request  of  a  Gentile,  the  centurion  would  not 
come  in  person,  but  sent  a  deputation  of  elders  of  the 
Jewish  synagogue  to  plead  his  cause.  They  represented 
that,  Gentile  though  he  was,  he  had  shown  kindness 
to  their  nation,  and  had  even  built  the  local  synagogue. 
It  would  seem  from  this  that  he  belonged  to  the  '  God- 
fearing '  or  wider  class  of  proselytes.  But  when  Jesus 
started  to  come,  he  again  sent  servants  saying  that  he 
was  not  fit  to  receive  Him  under  his  roof ;  using  his 
own  experience  of  military  discipline,  he  urged  that  surely 
Jesus,  like  a  Roman  officer,  had  only  to  give  the  com- 
mand and  His  will  would  be  obeyed.  Amazed  at  finding 
such  remarkable  faith  in  so  unexpected  a  quarter,  Jesus 
exclaimed,  '  I  have  not  found  so  great  faith,  no,  not 
in  Israel.'  The  messengers  returned  to  find  the  slave 
recovered. 

Whether  or  not  this  is  to  be  identified  with  the 
miracle  in  St.  John  will  probably  always  remain  a 
debated  point.  On  the  whole  it  seems  likely  that  the 
two  accounts  refer  to  different  incidents ;  though 
St.  John  may  have  been  influenced  in  phraseology  by 
the  Synoptic  narrative.  Certainly  if  we  have  here  two 
versions  of  the  same  incident,  either  St.  John  or  the 
Synoptists  have  given  us  a  totally  false  impression ; 
since,  putting  aside   differences  of   detail,  the   central 


OPENING  OF  GALILEAN  MINISTRY        79 

feature  of  the  history  is  essentially  different  in  the  two 
accounts.  In  the  Synoptic  narrative  the  remarkable 
faith  shown  by  the  centurion  of  his  own  accord  rouses 
the  surprise  of  Jesus :  while  in  St.  John  the  faith  of  the 
man,  originally  weak,  is  drawn  forth  by  the  test  imposed 
by  Jesus.  St.  Matthew  connects  with  this  miracle  a  Matt.  viii. 
saying  of  Jesus,  taken  probably  from  the  Logia,  that  n>  12- 
the  time  was  coming  when  the  Gentiles  from  all  parts 
should  enter  into  the  blessings  of  the  Messianic  King- 
dom, while  the  Jews,  the  children  of  the  Kingdom, 
should  be  cast  out.  This  saying  is  placed  by  St.  Luke 
in  quite  a  different  context  (Luke  xiii.  28,  29),  in  con- 
nexion with  Jesus'  answer  to  the  question,  '  Lord,  are 
they  few  that  be  saved  \ ' 

Jesus  now  opened  His  public  ministry :  He  began  by 
taking  up  the  announcement  already  made  by  John, 
'The  kingdom  of  heaven  is  at  hand,'  and  calling  on 
men  to  accept  the  good  news  of  its  approach  and  make 
ready  for  it  by  repentance :  but  we  learn  from  the 
Marcan  source  that  He  gave  even  greater  urgency  to 
the  proclamation  by  adding  the  words,  '  The  time  is 
fully  come.'  Thus  He  began  at  this  early  stage  by 
demanding  not  faith  in  His  Person,  but  in  His  message  : 
He  called  on  men  to  believe  that  now  the  Messianic 
Kingdom  was  coming  into  their  midst,  but  as  yet  He 
did  not  further  decide  the  character  of  the  Kingdom. 

At  the  very  outset  of   His   ministry  in  Galilee   He  The  Call 
called  four  of  those  who  had  previously  been  with  Him  j)iscfPiesSt 
in  Judaea,  finally  to  abandon  their  old  occupations  and  Mark  i. 
attach   themselves  to  Him.      The   men  to  whom  this  M~t"j.  *. 
decisive  summons  was  first  addressed  were  the   same  18-22. 
two  pairs  of  brothers  who  had  been  the  earliest  to  join  ^^  y 
Him.     They  had  meanwhile,  on  their  return  to  Galilee, 
resumed  their  old   trade  of  fishing.     The  summons  of 


80     OUTLINES  OF  THE  SYNOPTIC  RECORD 

Jesus  now  came  to  them  while  actively  engaged  in 
their  ordinary  work,  Simon  and  Andrew  casting  a 
net  into  the  sea,  and  James  and  John  in  their  boat 
mending  their  nets — thus  clearly  showing  to  them  that 
it  involved  a  complete  break  with  their  old  life.  It  is 
important  to  notice  the  actual  words  of  the  call  ad- 
dressed to  Simon  and  Andrew :  '  Come  ye  after  Me, 
and  I  will  make  you  to  become  fishers  of  men.' 
The  words  expressed  summarily  the  two  parts  of  which 
their  future  work  was  to  consist :  first,  that  of  being  in 
the  company  of  Jesus  ;  and,  second,  that  of  working  for 
Him  and  gaining  adherents  to  His  cause.  This  double 
function  of  the  followers  of  Jesus  is  always  carefully 
marked  out  in  the  Gospel  narrative :  thus  (Mark  iii. 
14,  15)  the  work  of  the  Twelve  is  (i)  '  that  they  might 
be  with  Him,'  (ii)  '  and  that  He  might  send  them  forth 
to  preach,  and  to  have  authority  to  cast  out  devils.' 
Here  again  we  notice  that  no  profession  of  faith  in  the 
Person  of  Jesus,  beyond  that  amount  of  recognition 
involved  in  obedience  to  His  word,  is  required  of  them. 
The  conviction  of  His  Messiahship  was  to  spring  from 
personal  experience  and  intercourse  with  Him. 

In  St.  Luke's  account  this  call  is  connected  with  a 
miraculous  draught  of  fishes.  He  relates  that  Jesus  had 
entered  into  Peter's  boat,  when  he  and  his  comrade  had 
spent  a  long  night  in  fruitless  fishing,  and  bade  him  let 
down  his  net  for  a  draught.  Peter  obeyed,  and  imme- 
diately enclosed  a  catch  so  great  that  the  net  began  to 
break.  Overwhelmed  by  dread  at  this  miraculous 
manifestation  of  the  power  of  Jesus,  Peter  fell  at  His 
feet  and  besought  Him  to  leave  him  :  •  Depart  from  me  ; 
for  I  am  a  sinful  man,  0  Lord.'  In  reply,  he  received 
the  summons,  '  Fear  not ;  from  henceforth  thou  shalt 
catch  men.' 


OPENING  OF  GALILEAN  MINISTRY         81 

Now  a  miracle,  which  appears  to  be  the  same  as  that 
recorded  by  St.  Luke,  is  placed  in  the  Fourth  Gospel 
among  the  appearances  after  the  Resurrection  (John 
xxi) ;  and  there  seems  to  be  a  strong  probability  that 
this  is  its  true  position.  It  may  be  that  St.  Luke,  not 
knowing  of  the  earlier  call  recorded  in  St.  John  (chap,  i), 
was  at  a  loss  to  account  for  this  prompt  obedience  to  the 
summons  of  Jesus,  as  it  stood  in  St.  Mark,  and,  finding 
in  another  source  the  narrative  of  the  miraculous 
draught  of  fishes,  he  concluded  that  it  belonged  to  this 
occasion. 

Jesus  took  up  His  residence  at  Capernaum,  intending  Jesus  in 
apparently  to  make  that  His  head  quarters  for  preaching.  „0l.nJ2t' 
We  then  have  a  full  account  of  a  Sabbath  spent  there.  Caper- 
Jesus  naturally  began  by  teaching  in  the  synagogue :  jjj  ™£ 'i 
there  men  were  struck  by  the  tone  of  authority  in  His  21-28. 
teaching,  which  distinguished  it  from  that  of  the  Scribes.  3:[1_3e71V ' 
In  the  synagogue  was  a  man  '  with  an  unclean  spirit.' 
This  is  the  first  mention  of  that  demoniacal  possession 
of  which  we  hear  so  frequently  in  the  Synoptic  Gospels. 
It  is  beyond  our  scope  to  discuss  what  was  the  exact 
nature  of  this  mysterious  phenomenon.      It  certainly 
appears   that   under   this   description   were   classed   in 
Palestine  at  that  time  various  forms  of  nervous  diseases, 
which  in   those   days  could  not  be  accounted  for  by 
natural  causes.     Here,  as  on  other  occasions,  the  pos- 
sessed recognized  at  once  the  presence  of  Divine  power 
in  Jesus,  and  proclaimed  it  with  the  cry,  '  What  have 
I  to  do  with  Thee,  Thou  Jesus  of  Nazareth  ?     Art  Thou 
come  to  destroy  us  ?     I  know  Thee  who  Thou  art,  the 
Holy  One  of  God.' 

It  is  noticeable  how  at  this  early  stage  of  the 
ministry  the  only  recognition  of  Jesus  as  the  Messiah 
comes  from  demoniacs,  and  how  urgently  in  each  case 


82     OUTLINES  OF  THE  SYNOPTIC  RECORD 

He  silences  their  announcement.  Such  a  confession 
was  at  the  present  stage  premature  and  dangerous  to 
His  work.  In  this  case  the  expulsion  of  the  unclean 
spirit  was  attended  by  violent  convulsions  and  cries. 
St.  Mark  records  the  amazement  produced  on  the 
beholders,  which  found  expression  in  the  excited  and 
incoherent  comments,  '  What  is  this  ?  a  new  teaching  ! 
with  authority  He  commandeth  even  the  unclean  spirits, 
and  they  obey  Him.' 
Healing  of  Immediately  on  leaving  the  synagogue,  He  entered 
J!!^55       into  the  house  of  Simon  and  Andrew,  and  there  healed 

Wires 

Mother,      the  niother-in-law  of  Simon,  who  was  lying  sick  of  a 

Mark  i.        fPVpr 

29-31.  Ie^er' 

Matt.  viii.       The  news  of  these  two  miracles  produced  the  most 

l^'}0:        intense  excitement  throughout  the  city :  so  that,  as  soon 

Luke  iv.  &  J  '  ' 

38,  39.        as  ever  sunset  brought  the  Sabbath  to  a  close,  a  crowd 
Healing  of  collected  round  the  door  of  the  house,  bringing  with 

Sick  at 

Evening    them   those   suffering   from  various   forms   of   disease. 

Mark  i.       Jesus  healed  a  large  number  of  these,  including  many 

Matt.  Viii.  possessed  with  unclean  spirits,  and  these,  as  before,  He 

16, 17.        would  not  allow  to  make  Him  known.    The  full  account 

40, 41.        which   St.    Mark   gives   of    the   incidents  of   this   first 

Sabbath  at  Capernaum  is  probably  intended  to  show 

the  activity  of  the  ministry  of  Jesus  during  this  period 

and  the  impression  which  it  produced  on  the  minds  of 

the  people.     Clearly,  however,  this  popular  excitement 

was  by  no  means  welcome  to  Jesus.     He  knew  that  His 

mission  must  be  seriously  interfered  with,  if  He  were 

thus  forced  to  accept  the  role  of  a  worker  of  miraculous 

Flight  of    cures.     Thus  in  the  present  instance,  in  order  to  avoid 

Mark'i        ^is  danger,  He  escaped  before  daybreak  the  following 

35-38.        morning   from   Capernaum,    and    engaged    in    solitary 

42  431V      prayer  to  God,  probably  for  guidance  in  view  of  this 

popular     outburst.      The    withdrawal     was     not     un- 


OPENING  OF  GALILEAN  MINISTRY        83 

necessary:  very  soon  the  disciples,  headed  by  Simon, 
tracked  Him  out  (KareStw^ev)  with  the  news,  '  All  are 
seeking  Thee.'  Jesus  replied  by  explaining  that  it  was 
not  His  intention  to  confine  Himself  to  Capernaum  ;  He 
therefore  called  on  them  to  accompany  Him  to  the 
surrounding  villages,  that  He  might  preach  in  them  also, 
since  it  was  with  the  view  of  carrying  out  this  object 
that  He  had  withdrawn  from  Capernaum. 

St.  Mark  then  gives  a  summary  account  of  the  work 
of  the  period,  before  relating  in  detail  any  of  the  inci- 
dents which  belong  to  it.  He  states  that  Jesus  came 
preaching  throughout  the  synagogues  of  Galilee.  This 
synagogue  preaching  is  specially  mentioned  as  charac- 
teristic of  the  early  months  of  the  ministry.  The 
synagogues,  as  the  usual  places  of  religious  assembly, 
naturally  at  first  afforded  Him  the  best  opportunity 
of  delivering  His  message.  Of  this  opportunity  He 
availed  Himself,  until  it  would  appear  that,  owing  to 
the  growing  opposition  of  the  religious  authorities,  the 
synagogues  were  closed  to  Him. 

It  seems  not  unlikely  that  during  the  course  of  these  Visit  to 
journeys  in  Galilee  occurred  the  visit  to  Jerusalem  to  Unnamed 
the  feast  mentioned  in  St.  John  v.  1,  which  is  generally  John  V.  l. 
described  as  '  The  Unknown  Feast.' 

In  the  summary  of  the  period  St.  Mark  notes  as  its  Preaching 
leading  feature,  besides  preaching,  the  casting  out  devils,  ?°^n^ 
and  it  would  appear  that  at  this  early  stage  the  cure  of  Mark  i.  39.' 
these   nervous   diseases  formed   the   chief  part  of  the  ^^r 1V" 
miracles  of  Jesus.  Lukeiv.44. 

We  have  a  detailed  account  of  one  miracle,  the  heal-  Healing  of 
ing  of  the  leper,  which  is  apparently  given  as  a  sort  of  MLejj>r' 
specimen  of  the  miracles  performed  by  Jesus  at  this  40-45. 
time.     It  would  appear  from  St.  Mark  that  it  took  place  ?**tt#  vm* 
in  a  house,  or  more  probably  a  synagogue  (cf.  use  of  the  Luke  v. 

G2  12-10- 


84     OUTLINES  OF  THE  SYNOPTIC  RECORD 

word  i£e\6u)v).  Jesus  frequently  in  the  course  of  His 
ministry  met  with  victims  *of  this  loathsome  disease, 
which  was  then,  as  now,  common  in  the  East ; 
owing  to  its  supposed  contagious  character  lepers  were 
by  the  law  of  Moses  forced  to  live  in  complete  isolation. 
We  are  not  told  whether  Jesus  had  on  any  previous 
occasion  healed  this  disease ;  but  in  this  case  the  man 
was  completely  convinced  that  He  had  the  power  to  do 
so.  He  came  up  and  kneeled  to  Him  with  his  request, 
'  If  Thou  wilt,  Thou  canst  make  me  clean.'  Moved  with 
compassion  for  the  sufferer,  Jesus  at  once  healed  him 
with  a  touch.  This  act  of  touching  a  leper,  by  the 
strict  Mosaic  law,  rendered  Him  unclean;  so  that  we 
have  here  the  first  instance  in  which  Jesus,  in  the  per- 
formance of  an  act  of  mercy,  disregarded  the  letter  of 
the  law.  He  then  in  strictest  terms  commanded  the 
man  to  keep  his  cure  an  absolute  secret,  making  no 
mention  of  it  to  any  one.  He  wished  probably  to  avoid 
such  a  recurrence  of  the  popular  enthusiasm  as  would 
follow  from  the  news  of  the  miracle.  He  further  com- 
manded the  man  to  go  at  once  to  the  priest,  and  make 
the  offering  prescribed  in  the  law  for  such  a  case.  This 
command  had  probably  a  double  object.  It  showed  the 
man  that  the  miraculous  nature  of  the  cure  did  not 
release  him  from  the  necessity  of  observing  the  require- 
ments of  the  law ;  while  on  the  other  hand  it  was,  He 
declared,  to  be  '  for  a  testimony  unto  them,'  i.  e.  either 
to  the  priests  or  to  the  Jews,  since  it  showed  that  Jesus 
Himself  insisted  on  the  observance  of  the  Mosaic  law, 
where  no  exceptional  reasons  existed  for  its  violation. 
The  strict  injunction  of  secrecy,  however,  produced  no 
effect.  The  man  immediately  spread  the  tidings  abroad, 
and  the  result  followed  which  Jesus  had  sought  to  avoid. 
The  excitement  was  such  that  Jesus  could  no  longer 


OPENING  OF  GALILEAN  MINISTRY        85 

even  enter  the  villages,  but  was  again  forced  to  with- 
draw into  desert  places.  Yet  even  here  the  crowds 
came  to  Him  from  all  quarters.  Thus  we  see  vividly, 
in  St.  Mark's  narrative,  how  deep  and  widespread  was 
the  popular  excitement  already  aroused  throughout 
Galilee  by  the  words  and  works  of  Jesus.  The  with- 
drawal, which  was  the  result  of  the  disobedience  of  the 
leper,  was  probably  only  one  of  many  similar  retire- 
ments. 

But  it  seems  that  from  the  first,  side  by  side  with  this 
popularity,  Jesus  was  causing  enmity  and  opposition. 
What  were  the  chief  causes  which  gave  rise  to  this 
opposition  will  be  considered  in  a  later  chapter. 


CHAPTER    V 
THE  TEACHING  OF  JESUS 

Characteristics  of  the  Teaching.— Subjects  of  the  Teaching.— 
The  Sermon  on  the  Mount. 

Matthew  v,  vi,  vii ;   Luke  vi.  20-49,  xi.  9-13,  xii.  22- 
34,  58,  59,  xiv.  34,  35. 
The  Teach-      Before  proceeding  with  the  narrative  of  the  outward 
Jesus.         course  of  the  ministry  of  Jesus,  something  must  be  said 
in  regard  to  the  character  and  contents  of  His  teaching. 
Almost  at  the  outset  of  the  ministry,  immediately  after 
his  summary  mention  of  the  synagogue  preaching,  the 
first  Evangelist  records  a  long  discourse  of  Jesus  extend- 
The  Ser-    mg  over  three  chapters.     This  discourse,  which  is  said 
mononthe  to  have  been  delivered  on   'the   mountain/  and  has 
therefore  been  generally  known  as  '  The  Sermon  on  the 
Mount,'  is  addressed  to  His  disciples,  but  in  the  presence 
of  the  multitude. 
St.  Luke's      A  large  section  of  it  occurs  in  St.  Luke's  Gospel  in 
Version.     a  different  connexion,  being  placed  immediately  after 
20-49.         the  call  of  the  Twelve,  but  prefaced  by  a  similar  intro- 
duction.     Other   portions  are  found  scattered  up  and 
down  his  Gospel,  assigned  probably  to  what  the  Evan- 
gelist regarded  as  their  historic  connexion.   St.  Matthew 
seems  here,  after  his  usual  manner,  to  have  collected 
into  one  continuous  address  teachings,  many  of  which 
were  given  on  different  occasions  in  the  course  of  the 
ministry  :  this  discourse  he  places  in  the  forefront  of  his 
Gospel  as  a  sort  of  manifesto,  setting  forth  the  cardinal 


THE  TEACHING  OF  JESUS  87 

principles  of  Jesus,  and  the  demands  which  He  made 
on  those  who  would  become  members  of  the  Kingdom. 
It  will,  therefore,  be  convenient  to  treat  the  address  as 
a  whole,  as  it  stands  in  his  Gospel.  A  study  of  its 
contents  will  serve  to  bring  out  certain  distinctive 
features  in  Jesus'  method  of  teaching,  and  make 
clearer  wherein  consisted  the  unique  influence  which 
that  teaching  has  exercised  not  only  over  His  contemp- 
oraries, but  also  over  all  succeeding  generations.  Such 
an  examination  will  also  guide  us  to  the  principles 
of  interpretation  to  be  applied  to  particular  sayings. 

In  considering  then  His  method,  we  notice  :  Charac- 

(a)  How  largely  His  teaching  consisted  of  pithy,  sen-  0f"he1CS 
tentious   sayings,  which   could  not   fail   to   arrest   the  Teaching 
attention   and  fix   themselves   in   the   memory  of   the  ^prayer- 
hearers.     They  are  of  the  nature  of  proverbs  ;  each  one,  bial  Say- 
like a  gem,  quite  complete  in  itself :    '  Ask,  and  it  shall  in§s' 

be  given  unto  you,'  'Judge  not,  that  ye  be  not  judged,' 
1  Ye  are  the  light  of  the  world ' :  such  sayings,  once 
heard,  could  not  be  quickly  forgotten ;  and  in  this  way 
they  could  be  easily  preserved  in  that  process  of  oral 
transmission  through  which  they  had  to  pass  before 
being  committed  to  writing. 

(b)  We  perceive  too,  that  the  teaching  is  largely  pic-  (&)  Its  Pic* 
torial  in  character,  filled  with  illustrations  drawn  from  character, 
the  sights  of  daily  life,  the  flowers  of  the  field,  and  the 

birds  of  the  air.  So  too  we  find  that,  throughout,  He 
enforces  His  lessons  by  means  of  concrete  instances, 
rather  than  general  abstract  rules  of  life  :  thus  He  does 
not  merely  lay  down  the  law  of  universal  charity  by 
bidding  men  return  good  for  evil,  but  gives  striking 
examples  of  the  way  in  which  the  law  is  to  be  carried 
out,  as,  that  to  one  who  smites  them  on  the  right  cheek 
they  should  turn  the  other  also,  or  '  If  any  man  would 


88     OUTLINES  OF  THE  SYNOPTIC  RECORD 

go  to  law  with  thee,  and  take  away  thy  coat,  let  him 
have  thy  cloke  also.' 

(c)  With-        (c)  It  is  obvious  that  such  terse  epigrammatic  sayings, 
fixations     ^u^  °^  comPresse(l   meaning,   are   apt,  when  they  are 

isolated,  to  appear  paradoxical  or  one-sided,  and  in 
some  cases  even  mutually  contradictory.  Jesus  how- 
ever made  no  attempt  to  introduce  qualifications,  or  to 
explain  how  far  and  in  what  circumstances  each  held 
good.  This  was  a  marked  point  of  difference  between 
His  teaching  and  that  of  the  Scribes,  which  was  largely 
occupied  with  applying  the  principles  of  the  law  to  all 
the  petty  details  of  life.  Jesus,  on  the  other  hand,  left 
men  to  apply  the  principles  for  themselves,  and  intro- 
duce their  own  qualifications.  In  so  doing  He  followed 
His  constant  practice  of  demanding  some  effort  on  the 
part  of  His  hearers;  His  teaching  was  intended  to 
stimulate  thought,  not  to  save  men  trouble. 

(d)  Its  (d)  Another  point,  which  attracted  even  greater  sur- 
Authoritv  Pr*se>  was  tne  note  °f  authority  which  rang  through  all 

His  utterances.  In  marked  contrast  to  the  methods  of 
the  Scribes,  who  were  continually  referring  men  to  the 
dicta  of  famous  Rabbis,  was  the  unqualified  assertion  of 
personal  authority,  '  Ye  have  heard  that  it  was  said  to 
them  of  old  time,  .  .  .  but  I  say  unto  you.' 
Subjects         In  regard  to  the  subject  of  the  teaching  of  Jesus,  it 

of  the         kas  Deen  observed  that  it  centres  round  the  two  most 

Teaching. 

elementary  of  all  human  relationships,  the  family  and 

the  organized  state.     In  this  way  He  brings  out  the  two 

complementary  sides  of   God's   relation   to  men,  as  a 

Father  and  a  King.    Both  these  conceptions  run  through 

the  Sermon  on  the  Mount. 

(i)  The  (i)  The  Fatherhood  of  God  was  from  one  point  of  view 

hoocTof'      ^e  new  element  m  the  teaching  of  Jesus.     The  term 

God.  *  Father '  had  indeed  been  applied  to  Jehovah  in  the 


THE  TEACHING  OF  JESUS  89 

Old  Testament,  but  He  was  regarded  only  as  Father  of 
the  chosen  nation,  or  of  the  king  as  representative  of  the 
nation.  Jesus  went  beyond  this,  by  teaching  that  God 
was  the  Father  of  every  individual  man.  The  opening 
words  of  the  prayer  which  He  taught  to  His  disciples, 
'  Our  Father,'  strike  the  key-note  of  the  revelation 
of  God,  which  He  brought  to  men.  Indeed,  He  takes 
this  fact  of  the  Fatherhood  of  God  as  the  principle 
on  which  His  teaching  is  based  as  to  Christian  life  and 
conduct,  in  regard  to  such  subjects  as  prayer  and 
anxiety. 

(ii)  The  other  conception  of  God,  as  King,  is  brought  (H)  The 
out  by  the  term  '  The  Kingdom  of  God '  or  '  Kingdom  f^g0dd°m 
of  Heaven,'  which  is  of  such  frequent  occurrence  in  the 
mouth  of  Jesus  in  the  Synoptic  Gospels.  The  latter 
term,  '  Kingdom  of  Heaven,'  is  chiefly  found  in  St.  Mat- 
thew, but  there  seems  no  reason  to  doubt  that  the  two 
expressions  are  interchangeable.  In  adopting  it,  St.  Mat- 
thew is  probably  following  the  Jewish  custom  of  substi- 
tuting such  a  synonym  for  the  sacred  name  '  Jehovah.' 
John  the  Baptist  had  already  heralded  the  approach  of 
the  Messiah  with  the  announcement,  '  The  kingdom  of  Matt,  iii.  2. 
heaven  is  at  hand.'  Jesus  opened  His  ministry  with 
a  like  announcement,  and  almost  from  the  first  the 
Gospel  of  the  Kingdom  formed  the  leading  subject  of 
His  public  teaching.  The  expression,  'The  Kingdom  of 
God,'  was  a  familiar  one  to  His  hearers  ;  for  the  Jews  of 
His  day,  the  term  summed  up  the  varied  hopes  and 
expectations  as  to  the  coming  Messianic  Kingdom,  which 
at  the  time  prevailed  throughout  the  nation.  Here  we 
have  a  case  where  Jesus  adopted  a  term  in  common 
use,  but,  discarding  all  that  was  materialistic  in  the 
old  idea,  imparted  to  it  a  fuller  spiritual  meaning.  A 
chief  aim  of  His  teaching  was  to  lead  His  countrymen 


90     OUTLINES  OF  THE  SYNOPTIC  RECORD 

to  a  truer  conception  of  the  character  of  the  Kingdom, 
and  of  the  conditions  required  for  sharing  its  privileges. 
The  exact  meaning  of  the  phrase  in  the  mouth  of  Jesus 
was  clearly  elastic,  and  varies  in  different  passages. 

Generally  it  may  be  said  that  the  term  *  Kingdom '  or 
'  Sovereignty '  of  God — for  17  fiao-ikda  tov  6eov  may  bear 
either  interpretation — represents  that  perfect  theocracy 
or  direct  reign  of  God,  which  appears  as  the  true  ideal 
of  the  national  polity  throughout  the  Old  Testament ; 
the  ideal  had  indeed  as  yet,  owing  to  the  faithlessness 
of  king  or  people,  never  found  its  complete  fulfilment ; 
that  perfect  theocracy  or  Divine  rule,  in  the  world  and 
in  the  hearts  of  men,  Jesus  now  came  to  set  up.  Thus, 
then,  the  words  stand  for  that  perfect  system  of  in- 
visible spiritual  laws  by  which  God's  will  for  men  is  fully 
Hastings'  carried  out  (cf .  Dr.  Hort's  definition  quoted  by  Professor 
B'D\\  Sanday).  The  term  occurs  but  infrequently  in  St.  John's 
p.  619.  Gospel,  but  nearly  corresponds  to  the  phrase  common 
in  that  Gospel,  '  eternal  life.'  Thus,  while  the  King- 
dom might  be  regarded  as  in  one  sense  present,  since  it 
was  brought  into  existence  with  the  coming  of  Jesus, 
it  was  from  another  point  of  view  future,  since  He 
showed  that  its  establishment  was  as  yet  incomplete, 
and  must  be  a  process  of  gradual  growth  :  it  was  in  this 
latter  view  of  it  that  the  teaching  of  Jesus  diverged 
most  widely  from  current  ideas.  The  popular  Jewish 
expectation  looked  for  the  Kingdom  to  appear  suddenly 
from  heaven,  and  to  be  set  up  at  once  complete  and 
fully  developed.  Christ  taught  that  it  came  '  not  with 
observation ' :  for,  as  He  showed  in  the  parables  of  the 
Mustard  Seed  and  Leaven,  it  was  to  grow  and  spread 
gradually,  and,  though  its  origin  was  from  God,  effort 
was  required  on  the  part  of  men  to  enter  it  and  receive 
its  blessings.     Much  of  His  teaching  is  spent  in  drawing 


THE  TEACHING  OF  JESUS  91 

out  the  laws  by  which  this  Divine  order  is  governed ; 
especially  is  this  subject  a  central  theme  of  the 
parables. 

The  Sermon  on   the  Mount  opens  with  a  series  of  Contents 
seven  Beatitudes,  describing  the  features  of  character  ge  *meon  on 
which  fit  men  to  share  in  the  blessings  of  the  Divine  the  Mount. 
Kingdom ;  to  which  are  appended  two  more,  pronouncing  The  Beati- 
a  blessing  on  those  who  suffer  persecution  for  righteous-  Matt.V. 
ness'  sake  or  in  Christ's   cause.     In  this  series  Jesus  3-12. 
held  up  a  view  of  that  in  which  true  happiness  consisted, 
which  was  entirely  at  variance  with  all  the  ideals  of  the 
ancient  world.     On  turning  to  St.  Luke  we  find  the  St.  Luke's 
discourse  introduced  by  a  contrast  set  forth  in  a  series  theBeati*- 
of  four  Beatitudes   and  four   Woes.     When   we   com-  tudes. 
pare  the  two,  we  notice  that  while  the  description  in  20-2Q 
St.  Matthew  refers  mainly  to  points  of  inward  character, 
that  in  St.  Luke  deals  with  outward  conditions  of  hard- 
ship and  suffering.    Further,  in  St.  Luke,  Jesus  employs 
throughout  the  direct  form  of  address,  'Blessed  are  ye 
poor,'  &c.     Thereby,  having  clearly  in  view  His  own 
disciples,  He  contrasts  the  external  trials  of  their  present 
condition  with  their  future  reward ;  while  the  Woes  on 
the  other  hand  show  that  those  who  now  enjoy  outward 
prosperity  will  hereafter  in  their  turn  have  to  suffer. 
We  notice,  too,  that   in   St.  Matthew  the  Beatitudes, 
referring  as  they  do  to  inward  temper,  are  by  the  use 
of  the  third  person,  '  Blessed  are  they,'  &c,  made  more 
general  in  character. 

In  the  ensuing  section  of  the  Sermon  on  the  Mount  The  In- 
our  Lord,  directly  addressing  His  disciples,  sets  before  ^se"Ci  of 
them  the  importance  of  their  influence  on  others.     That  Matt.  v. 
influence,  working  from  within,  is  to  act  like  salt  as  13~16- 
a  purifying  health-giving  power  in  society;  while  out- 
wardly their  example  is  to  be  like  a  light  in  the  world, 


92     OUTLINES  OF  THE  SYNOPTIC  RECORD 

holding  up  before  men  the  ideal  of  a  good  life,  and 
thereby  leading  others  to  glorify  their  heavenly  Father. 
Mark  ix.         A  similar  comparison  of  the  influence  of  the  disciples 
to  salt  occurs  in  St.  Mark,  where  it  is  appended  to  the 
Luke  xiv.   discourse  on  offences ;    St.  Luke  also  retains  it  in  yet 
'     "        another  connexion,  where  Jesus  is  speaking  of  the  spirit 
of  sacrifice  demanded  of  those  who  would  become  His 
followers. 
Jesus'  Then  follows,  in  St.  Matthew,  a  long  section  in  which 

to  the  6     Jesus  se^s  forth  His  own  attitude  to  the  Jewish  law, 
Law.  and  explains  the  principles  on  which  it  is  to  be  observed 

17-48.  '  ky  His  followers.  This  section,  with  the  exception  of 
a  few  sayings  here  and  there,  is  not  found  in  St.  Luke. 
Yet  we  can  well  imagine  that  at  the  time  the  question 
as  to  what  was  the  attitude  of  this  new  Teacher  to  the 
Mosaic  law  must  have  been  one  of  burning  interest. 
We,  at  the  end  of  nineteen  centuries  of  Gentile  Christi- 
anity, are  apt  to  overlook  the  importance  of  the  subject 
to  the  hearers  of  Jesus.  The  law  of  Moses  was  the  very 
basis  of  their  religious  life.  The  antagonism  between 
Jesus  and  the  recognized  teachers  of  the  law  was,  almost 
from  the  first,  clearly  marked ;  hence  it  might  not 
unnaturally  be  suggested  that  this  new  Teacher,  who 
thus  set  Himself  in  opposition  to  the  Scribes,  was  come 
to  abrogate  the  Mosaic  law,  and  to  set  before  men  some 
easier  and  less  exacting  standard  of  life.  The  opening 
words  of  Jesus  are  clearly  intended  to  remove  at  once 
Matt.v.17.  such  a  misconception.  'Think  not,'  He  declares,  'that 
I  came  to  destroy  the  law  or  the  prophets :  I  came  not 
to  destroy,  but  to  fulfil ' :  so  far,  that  is,  from  intending 
to  supersede  the  law,  He  came  to  fulfil  it,  by  bringing  to 
completion  all  that  was  involved  in  the  meaning  of  the 
old  dispensation.  Hence,  He  announced,  He  required 
of  men  a  higher  ideal  of  righteousness  than  that  recog- 


THE  TEACHING  OF  JESUS  93 

nized  by  the  Scribes  and  Pharisees,  who  had  failed  to 
grasp  the  true  purpose  of  the  law,  and  had  neglected 
the  teaching  of  the  prophets  altogether. 

Jesus    then    illustrates  this   principle   by   instancing 
certain  precepts  of  the  Mosaic  law,  and  showing  in  each 
case  that  He  requires  a  fuller  and  more  perfect  observ- 
ance of  them  on  the  part  of  His  followers,  than  had 
been  required  by  the  Jewish  code.     They  are  not  to  be 
guided  by  the  mere  literal  precept,  but  are  to  go  down 
to  the  underlying  spirit  of  the  commandment.     Thus 
for  them  the  prohibition  of  murder  forbade  equally  the 
spirit  of  malice  and  hatred.    In  this  connexion  He  urges 
on  them  the  duty  of  promptness  in  making  reconcilia-  Matt.  v. 
tion,  by  referring  to  the  necessity,  in  cases  of  debt,  of     '     ' 
coming  to  terms  at  once,  before  the  law  is  in  motion. 
This  illustration,  as  it  stands  in  St.  Matthew,  seems  to 
break  the  continuity  of  the  discourse.     In  St.  Luke  it  Luke  xii. 
occurs  in  a  different  connexion,  where  Jesus  is  warning  '   ~    ' 
the  Jews  of  their  blindness  to  the  signs  of  the  times 
and  the   impending   Divine   judgement,  and  uses   this 
figure  to  enforce  the  urgency  of  making  reconciliation 
with  God,  before  it  should  be  too  late. 

In  reference  to  the  law  of  charity  He  shows  the  new 
motive  which  is  to  inspire  the  righteousness  of  His 
followers.  They  are  not  merely  to  seek  to  carry  out 
God's  commandments ;  but,  since  they  are  the  children 
of  God,  they  are  to  strive  to  attain  to  the  likeness  of 
God  Himself:  'Ye  therefore  shall  be  perfect,  as  your  Matt.  v.  48. 
heavenly  Father  is  perfect.' 

It  is  important  to  recognize  the  position  which  our  The  Claim 
Lord  here  takes  up  in  reference  to  the  old  dispensation.  j^^g 
He  virtually  claims  to  set  His  own  authority  side  by  side  Attitude. 
with  that  of  the  Divine  Lawgiver  :  '  Ye  have  heard  that 
it  was  said,  .  .  .  but  I  say  unto  you.'     It  is  true  that 


94     OUTLINES  OF  THE  SYNOPTIC  RECORD 

He  did  not  thereby  claim  to  abolish  the  old  law,  but 
He  did  claim  to  interpret  in  a  new  sense  its  underlying 
purpose.  In  one  instance  indeed,  in  regard  to  divorce, 
He  does  seem  to  remove  a  permission  expressly  given 
Cf.  Hort's  by  the  old  law ;  but  even  in  this  case  He  goes  behind 
Judaistic     the  j       tQ  the  tme  idea|  of  marrje(}  iife  set  forth  at  the 

Ltirislian- 

ity,  p.  33.    original  institution  of  human  society  (Gen.  ii.  24). 1 
Teaching       Then  follows  a  passage  in  which  Jesus  directs  His 
g?eltReli-  followers  as  to  their  conduct  in  regard  to  three  chief 
gious         observances  of  the  religious  life,  almsgiving,  prayer,  and 

Duties.        j.     .. 

Matt.  vi.     tasting. 

1-8, 16-18.  This  section,  which  seems  to  form  in  itself  a  complete 
whole,  except  for  the  insertion  in  the  paragraph  on 
prayer,  to  be  noticed  later,  is  probably  placed  here 
by  St.  Matthew  in  further  illustration  of  the  subject 
of  the  preceding  teaching.  In  reference  to  these  prac- 
tices, embracing  the  three  sides  of  religious  life,  a  man's 
duty  to  his  God,  his  neighbour,  and  himself,  the  Jews 
had  laid  down  formal  hard  and  fast  rules,  with  the 
result  that  their  observance  had  become  ostentatious 
and  unreal.  Jesus  declared  that  the  spirit  and  motive 
in  which  these  duties  were  to  be  carried  out  by  His 
followers  was  to  be  radically  different  from  that  of  the 
Pharisees,  who  proved  themselves  merely  hypocrites  and 
actors.  Their  motive  was  in  each  case  solely  to  gain 
the  approval  of  men ;  and  hence  these  acts  were  per- 
formed in  such  a  way  as  to  attract  attention  to  them- 
selves. That  object  they  indeed  attained.  Christians, 
however,  were  to  set  before  themselves  a  higher  aim ; 
since  they  in  these  acts  were  to  look  to  the  approval 
not  of  men,  but  of  their  Father  in  heaven.  Thus  their 
almsgiving,  prayer,  and  fasting  were  to  be  performed 
in  such  a  way  as  to  attract  the  least  possible  attention. 
1  See  below,  p.  206. 


THE  TEACHING  OF  JESUS  95 

Following  His  usual  method,  Jesus  does  not  simply 
warn  them  in  general  terms  against  an  ostentatious 
display  of  goodness,  but  enforces  the  principle  in  each 
case  by  a  striking  figure  to  show  its  application  :  He 
bids  them  '  When  thou  doest  alms,  let  not  thy  left  hand 
know  what  thy  right  hand  doeth,'  &c,  or,  '  Thou,  when 
thou  prayest,  enter  into  thine  inner  chamber,  and 
having  shut  thy  door,  pray  to  thy  Father  which  is  in 
secret,'  &c. ;  again,  '  Thou,  when  thou  fastest,  anoint 
thy  head  and  wash  thy  face ;  that  thou  be  not  seen 
of  men  to  fast,  but  of  thy  Father  which  is  in  secret,'  &c. 
The  reference  to  prayer  leads  St.  Matthew  to  insert  Further 
further  teaching  of  Jesus  on  the  subject,  dealing  with  ^Pra"8 
the  contrast  between  the  character  of  Christian  and  Matt.  vi. 
heathen  prayers.  The  prayers  of  His  followers  were 
not  to  be  mere  meaningless  repetitions,  as  if  a  multitude 
of  words  alone  could  gain  a  hearing :  their  prayer  was 
to  be  based  on  their  relationship  to  God  as  their  Father, 
who  therefore  knows  what  is  best  for  His  children. 
The  Lord's  Prayer  is  then  appended  as  a  model  to 
which  their  prayers  are  to  conform.  The  light  which 
it  throws  on  the  teaching  of  Jesus  in  regard  to  prayer 
must  be  kept  for  separate  consideration. 

The  assurance  of  the  beneficent  care  of  the  heavenly  Teaching 

Father  for  His  children  is  then  made  the  ground  for  °n   . 

°  Anxiety. 

further  teaching  as  to  their  need  to  be  on  their  guard  Matt.  vi. 
against  excessive  anxiety  as  to  worldly   concerns.     If  i9"jf4,  • 
their  heart  was  fixed  on  these,  it  must  be  turned  aside  34-36. 
from   that   undivided    allegiance   which   God    requires,  go"©?"31' 
They  must  learn  to  trust  His  Fatherly  providence,  and  xv'i.  13. 
make  it  their  first  aim  to  attain  the  heavenly  righteous- 
ness.    He  who  provided  for  the  flowers  of  the  field  and 
the  birds  of  the  air  would  much  more  watch  over  His 
own  children. 


96     OUTLINES  OF  THE  SYNOPTIC  RECORD 


Against 
censori- 
ousness. 
Matt.  vii. 
1-5. 

Luke  vi. 
37-42. 
Need  of 
Spiritual 
Discre- 
tion. 
Matt.  vii.  6. 

Persever- 
ance in 
Prayer. 
Matt.  vii. 
7-11. 
Luke  xi. 
9-13. 

The  Gold- 
en Rule. 
Matt.  vii. 
12. 

Lukevi.31, 
Entrance 
to  the 
Kingdom. 
Matt.  vii. 
13,  14. 
Luke  xiii. 
23,  24. 
Against 
False 
Teachers. 
Matt.  vii. 
15-23. 
Lukevi.46, 
xiii.  26, 27 

Conclud- 
ing Para- 
ble. 

Matt.  vii. 
24-27. 
Luke  vi. 
47-49. 


The  remainder  of  the  Sermon  on  the  Mount  consists 
of  a  series  of  precepts  and  warnings  on  various  points  of 
Christian  conduct.  Jesus  prohibits  the  censorious  spirit, 
which  renders  a  man  keen  to  discern  the  failings  of 
others,  while  he  is  blind  to  the  greater  faults  in  himself. 
To  this  is  appended  another  warning  with  little  apparent 
connexion  with  what  precedes.  In  their  anxiety  to 
reform  others  they  are  not  to  give  that  which  is  holy 
unto  the  dogs,  or  cast  their  pearls  before  the  swine : 
discretion  and  reserve  are  necessary  in  communicating 
religious  truth.  Jesus  then  bids  them  show  confidence 
and  perseverance  in  prayer :  while  in  their  dealings 
with  others  they  are  at  all  times  to  observe  the  golden 
rule  of  meting  out  the  same  treatment  which  they 
themselves  would  wish  to  receive.  He  further  warns 
them  that  admission  to  the  Kingdom  is  not  easy,  but 
that  the  gate  of  entrance  is  strait,  and  the  way  narrow. 
A  similar  saying  to  this  is  preserved  in  St.  Luke,  in 
what  may  probably  be  its  true  connexion,  as  a  reply  to 
the  question  addressed  to  Jesus,  'Lord,  are  they  few 
that  be  saved  ?  ' 

His  disciples,  therefore,  are  to  beware  of  being  led 
astray  by  false  teachers ;  their  true  character  is  in  every 
case  to  be  judged  by  their  actions,  as  a  tree  by  its  fruit ; 
indeed,  at  the  day  of  judgement  actions  alone  will  in  each 
case  prove  the  sole  test  by  which  He  will  accept  or 
reject  men. 

The  discourse,  both  in  St.  Matthew  and  St.  Luke, 
closes  with  the  twofold  Parable  of  the  House  built 
on  a  Rock  or  on  the  Sand;  showing  that  the  man 
who  carried  out  this  teaching  in  practice,  and  he  only, 
would  be  found  to  have  built  on  a  firm  and  secure 
foundation,  which  would  be  able  to  withstand  the 
storms  of  opposition  and  temptation. 


TEACHING  OF  JESUS  ON  PRAYER     97 

ADDITIONAL  NOTE  TO  CHAPTER  V. 

TEACHING  OF  JESUS  ON  PRAYER. 

The  Lord's  Prayer.— Conditions  of  Prayer.  — Parables  on 
Prayer. 

Mauk  xi.  23-25;    Matthew  vi.  9-15,  vii.  9-11,   xviii. 
21-35;   Luke  xi.  1-13,  xviii.  1-14. 

The  teaching  of  Jesus  on  the  subject  of  prayer  calls  Teaching 
for  a  somewhat  fuller  discussion  than  was  possible  in  on  Prayer, 
the  summary  of  the  Sermon  on  the  Mount.  The  peculiar 
importance  which  He  Himself  attached  to  prayer  was 
clearly  shown  by  His  own  practice,  as  well  as  by  His 
teaching.  He  was  in  the  habit  of  spending  whole 
nights  in  prayer  to  God,  more  especially  before  any 
great  crisis  of  His  work,  as  for  instance  before  the 
selection  of  the  Twelve,  on  the  occasion  of  the  Trans- 
figuration, which  marked  the  beginning  of  the  final  stage 
of  the  ministry,  and  on  the  eve  of  the  Passion. 

Jesus  taught  that  all  prayer  rested  on  the  fact  of  the 
Fatherhood  of  God :  and  in  the  prayer  which  He  gave 
to  His  disciples,  known  to  us  as  the  Lord's  Prayer,  He  The  Lord's 
laid   down  the   scope    and    character   of    the   requests  Prayer. 
which  might  be  rightly  uttered  by  His  followers  on  the  J^?'  V1* 
ground  of  this  filial  relationship  to  God.     This  prayer  is  Luke  xi. 
preserved  to  us  by  both  St.  Matthew  and  St.  Luke,  but  1-4. 
each  Evangelist  gives  it  in  a  different  connexion,   and 
in  a  somewhat  different  form.     There  seems,  however, 
no  sufficient  ground  for  supposing  that  the  prayer  was 
given  by  Jesus  on  two  separate  occasions ;    and  such 
a  repetition  is  in  itself  improbable.     St.  Matthew,  as  we 
have  seen,  inserts    the   prayer    in    the    section   of    the 
Sermon  on  the  Mount  dealing  with  that  subject ;   but, 
as  it  stands,  it  breaks  the  continuity  of  that  portion  of 
the  discourse,  \ihich  is  concerned  with  the  contrast  of 
Jewish  and  Christian  righteousness.     St.  Luke  says  that 
it  was  given  in  answer  to  the  request  of  a  disciple,  made 

H 


98     OUTLINES  OF  THE  SYNOPTIC  RECORD 

to  Jesus,  '  as  He  was  praying  in  a  certain  place,'  that  He 
would  teach  them  a  form  of  prayer,  as  John  also  taught 
his  disciples.  Yet  the  Evangelist,  by  the  vague  way  in 
which  he  introduces  the  incident,  seems  to  show  that  he 
had  no  certain  knowledge  at  what  period  of  the  ministry 
the  request  was  made.  It  may  be  well  to  place  side  by 
side  the  two  versions  of  the  prayer,  as  each  Evangelist 
gives  it. 

St.  Matthew.  St.  Luke. 

Our  Father,  Father, 
which  art  in  heaven, 

Hallowed  be  Thy  name.  Hallowed  be  Thy  name. 

Thy  kingdom  come.  Thy  kingdom  come. 

Thy  will  be  done,  as  in 
heaven,  so  on  earth. 

Give  us  this  day  our  daily  Give  us  day  by  day  our  daily 

bread.  bread. 

And  forgive  us  our  debts,  And  forgive  us  our  sins  ;  for 

as  we  also  have  forgiven  we  ourselves  also  forgive 

our  debtors.  every  one  that  is  indebted 

to  us. 

And  bring  us  not  into  temp-  And  bring  us  not  into  temp- 
tation,   but   deliver   us  tation. 
from  the  evil  one. 

It  would  at  first  sight  be  natural  to  prefer  the  briefer 
version  of  St.  Luke,  and  to  consider  that  this  has  been 
amplified  by  St.  Matthew,  since  in  such  cases  the 
shorter  form  is  generally  the  more  original.  Yet,  in 
this  instance,  the  possibility  must  be  allowed  that 
St.  Luke  retained  only  so  much  of  the  original  as 
appeared  to  him  essential  to  convey  his  meaning,  con- 
sidering the  omitted  portions  as  virtually  included  in 
those  which  he  preserves.  A  further  ground  for  con- 
sidering St.  Luke's  version  to  be  of  a  secondary  character 
is  afforded  by  the  fact  that  his  language,  where  the  two 
differ,  as  in  the  petitions  for  daily  bread  and  for  forgive- 
ness, appears  to  be  less  original,  and  has  probably  been 
modified  by  the  Evangelist.  The  doxology  which  is 
added  in  some  MSS.  of  St.  Matthew,  is  clearly  an  inser- 


TEACHING  OF  JESUS  ON  PRAYER  99 

tion  due  to  liturgical  usage,  and  based  probably  on  the 
analogy  of  similar  ascriptions  of  praise  to  Jehovah  in 
the  Old  Testament, 

Before  considering  the  prayer  in  detail,  we  may  notice 
one  or  two  points  in  which  it  illustrates  Jesus'  view  of 
prayer  in  general.  It  defines  the  true  scope  of  prayer,  and 
the  relative  importance  of  the  different  objects  for  which 
men  may  ask.  Thus  (a)  the  desire  for  God's  glory,  the 
attainment  of  which  is  presented  under  different  aspects 
in  each  of  the  first  three  petitions,  is  to  precede  that  for 
the  satisfaction  of  human  needs  :  it  thus  forms  a  striking 
illustration  of  the  principle  laid  down  by  Jesus  :  '  Seek 
ye  first  His  kingdom,  and  His  righteousness ;  and  all 
these  things  shall  be  added  unto  you.'  (b)  Prayer  for 
temporal  needs  is  not  indeed  excluded,  but  it  is  confined 
to  bare  necessaries  for  the  immediate  future :  men  may 
ask  only  for  bread  for  the  coming  day  (e7riot>o-io9). 
(c)  Further,  a  man  cannot  pray  merely  for  the  satis- 
faction of  his  own  personal  wishes,  as  if  he  could  isolate . 
himself  from  his  fellows :  in  addressing  the  Father  in 
heaven,  he  must  include  the  needs  of  all  His  children 
with  his  own  in  his  requests :  hence  throughout  we  find 
used  the  plural  pronouns  '  we  '  and  '  our,'  not  *  I '  and 
'my1.' 

Verbal  parallels  to  nearly  every  petition  in  the  prayer 
have  been  found  in  Jewish  writings,  yet   the   prayer 
itself  passes  beyond  all  local  or  national  limitations.     It 
expresses   the   simplest,  and  therefore  the  permanent, 
features  of  the  relations  of  man  to  God :  thus  its  terms 
are  adapted  to  the  use  of  men  of  every  station,  and  in 
every  age.     This  universal  character  of  the  prayer  is 
brought  out  by  the  opening  invocation  :  whereas  Jewish 
prayers  were  generally  addressed  to  the  '  Lord  God  of  Cf. 
Israel '  or  the  '  God  of  their  fathers,'  Jesus  substituted  Latham, 
for  this  a  new  form  of  address,  '  Our  Father ' ;  thus  show-  p"^M 
ing  that  all  meu  alike  have  free  access  to  God  as  their  p#  415.   ' 
Father  in  heaven. 

1  This  use  of  the  plural  may  be  accounted  for  as  being  due 
simply  to  the  fact  that  the  disciples  as  a  body  are  addressed,  and 
that  thus  the  singular  pronoun  would  sound  unnatural  in  such 
a  connexion. 

H  2 


100  OUTLINES  OF  THE  SYNOPTIC  RECORD 

'  Which  art  in  Heaven.''  By  adding  these  words  He 
taught  that,  while  claiming  the  rights  of  children,  men 
must  yet  approach  God  with  a  spirit  of  reverence,  and 
also  with  the  assurance  that  there  is  no  limitation  to 
His  power.  The  form  of  address,  '  Our  Father  which  art 
in  heaven,'  is  closely  parallel  to  that  found  in  St.  John 
(xvii.  11),  'Holy  Father'  :  in  either  case  the  ascription 
points  to  the  two  sides  of  the  Divine  character — the 
'  human '  and  the  transcendental,  the  new  and  the  old. 
Both  sides  need  to  be  fully  realized  by  one  who  would 
rightly  approach  God. 

The  prayer  itself  may  be  divided  into  six  petitions, 
the  first  three  of  which  aim  at  the  advancement  of 
God's  glory,  for  in  that  the  highest  good  of  man  consists, 
while  the  three  last  seek  the  satisfaction  of  human  needs. 
We  may  notice  very  briefly  the  main  ideas  conveyed  by 
each  petition. 

'Hallowed  be  thy  Name?  Here,  according  to  Old 
Testament  usage,  the  Name  means  the  whole  character 
of  God,  as  He  is  revealed  to  men.  This  petition  stands 
first,  since  on  a  right  knowledge  of  God,  as  He  is  made 
known  to  men  by  Jesus,  and  on  a  true  reverence  for 
Him,  all  acceptable  approach  to  Him  and  all  perfect 
fulfilment  of  His  Will  must  depend.  Jesus  thus  shows 
that  this  spirit  of  reverence  towards  God  was  in  no  way 
to  be  lessened  for  men  by  the  new  sense  that  they 
might  approach  Him  as  their  Father.  This  petition 
precedes  that  for  the  coming  of  His  Kingdom,  since  only 
when  this  true  reverence  was  attained  among  men, 
could  God's  rule  be  established  upon  earth. 

'  Thy  kingdom  come.'  Here,  as  elsewhere,  the  term 
may  be  understood  in  the  twofold  sense  of  '  the  King- 
dom '  or  '  the  Sovereignty  of  God.'  This  rule  of  God, 
though  in  one  sense  already  present  with  the  coming  of 
Jesus,  was  yet  also  future,  as  being  not  yet  fully  estab- 
lished among  men.  The  petitioner  here  prays  that  this 
rule  of  God  may  be  advanced  both  in  the  world  and  in 
his  own  heart. 

'  Thy  will  be  done,  as  in  heaven,  so  on  earth  V    This 

1  It  is  possible  that  the  concluding  words,  'as  in  heaven,  so  on 


TEACHING  OF  JESUS  ON  PRAYER         101 

petition  points  to  the  truth  that  this  establishment  of 
God's  rule  cannot  come  without  man's  co-operation  : 
men  on  their  part  must  seek  to  carry  out  the  Divine 
Will  in  their  own  lives  so  zealously,  and  submit  to  it  so 
absolutely,  that  it  may  find  as  complete  fulfilment  on 
earth,  as  it  does  in  heaven :  or,  to  put  the  same  truth 
from  another  side,  only  when  God's  rule  perfectly 
prevails  among  men,  is  complete  conformity  between 
the  human  and  Divine  wills  possible  on  earth. 

In  the  three  following  petitions  the  prayer  passes 
to  the  expression  of  the  common  needs  of  all  God's 
children : — 

'  Give   u£   this  day  our   daily   bread.'*     This   petition 
limits  man's  requests  to  the  bare  necessaries  of  life,  and 
that  only  for  the  coming  day,  not  for  any  distant  future. 
There  seems  little  doubt  that  the  difficult  word  '  daily  '  See  Light- 
(eVioiVtos)  has  a  temporal  sense  and  means  bread  '  for  foot>  °A 
the  coming  day.'  •£* 

'  Forgive  us  our  debts,  as  we  also  have  forgiven  our  0/n.t. 
debtors.'  Since  all  men  continually  fall  short  of  God's 
requirements,  and  transgress  His  commands,  they  stand 
in  constant  need  of  His  Fatherly  forgiveness  :  yet  Christ 
always  insisted  on  the  condition,  appended  to  this 
petition,  that  men  must  show  a  like  forgiving  spirit 
towards  the  offences  of  their  fellow  men,  if  they  would 
receive  from  their  heavenly  Father  the  pardon  which 
they  themselves  needed. 

But  while  he  needs  forgiveness  for  past  wrong-doing, 
the  Christian  needs  also  God's  protection,  to  guard  him 
from  falling  again  in  the  future.  He,  therefore,  must 
add  the  twofold  petition  : 

'  Bring  us  not  into  temptation,  but  deliver  us  from  the 
evil  one  V 

This  petition  presents    the    same    request  from   its 

earth,'  should  be  connected  with  each  of  the  three  preceding 
petitions  ('Hallowed  be  Thy  Name,  Thy  kingdom  come,  Thy  will 
be  done'),  and  not  only  with  the  last,  as  in  the  usual  division 
of  the  prayer. 

1  The  word  evil  {rod  rrovrjpov)  may  be  either  masculine  or  neuter, 
'  the  evil  one '  or  *  evil ' :  but  the  analogy  of  other  passages  in  the 
Gospels  points  strongly  to  the  masculine. 


102  OUTLINES  OF  THE  SYNOPTIC  RECORD 


Condi- 
tions of 
Prayer. 

(i)  Persis- 
tence. 

Luke  xi. 

5-8. 
xviit.  1-8. 


Matt.  vii. 
9-11. 
Luke  xi. 
11-13. 


(ii)  Humi- 
lity. 


Luke  xviii. 
9-14. 


positive  and  negative  sides.  Every  man  must  indeed 
be  exposed  to  temptation  to  sin  in  some  form,  but, 
conscious  of  his  own  weakness,  he  prays  God,  if  possible, 
to  shield  him  from  it :  yet,  since  complete  escape  from 
temptation  is  impossible,  he  adds  a  request  that  God 
may  bring  him  victorious  out  of  the  struggle,  not 
allowing  him  to  fall  a  victim  to  the  assaults  of  his 
unseen  foe. 

From  the  various  references  to  the  subject  in  the 
teaching  of  Jesus,  we  may  gather  the  conditions  on 
which  He  declared  that  prayer  would  find  acceptance 
with  God.  (i)  The  first  of  these  conditions,  on  which 
He  insisted  strongly,  was  the  patient  persistence  of  the 
petitioner.  He  enforced  this  by  two  parables,  that  of 
the  friend  requiring  three  loaves  at  midnight,  and  of  the 
widow,  who  by  her  importunity  wearied  out  the  un- 
righteous judge ;  if  men,  He  here  argues,  cannot  resist 
continued  importunity,  how  much  more  will  the  Father  in 
heaven  listen  to  the  prayers  of  His  children  ?  Thus  by  an 
a  fortiori  argument,  such  as  is  common  in  the  parables, 
He  draws  from  men's  conduct  the  assurance  that  God 
cannot  act  less  generously.  Jesus  employs  the  same 
line  of  argument  in  the  Sermon  on  the  Mount,  where 
He  says  that  a  human  father  will  not  give  his  son  what 
is  useless,  as  a  stone  if  he  ask  for  a  loaf,  or  even 
harmful,  as  a  scorpion  in  place  of  a  fish ;  and  then 
draws  the  conclusion,  '  If  ye  then,  being  evil,  know  how 
to  give  good  gifts  unto  your  children,  how  much  more 
shall  your  Father  which  is  in  heaven  give  good  things ' 
('  the  Holy  Spirit,'  Luke)  '  to  them  that  ask  Him  ? ' 

(ii)  He  further  insisted  that  prayer  must  be  offered 
in  a  spirit  of  humility — no  man  could  by  his  own  deserts 
have  any  claim  on  God  ;  hence,  any  temper  of  self- 
righteousness  was  inconsistent  with  true  prayer.  The 
contrast  of  the  true  and  false  spirit  in  prayer  He  illus- 
trated in  the  Parable  of  the  Pharisee  and  the  Publican  : 
He  there  declared  that  the  publican,  who  with  no  claim 
of  merit  pleaded  for  God's  mercy  to  him  a  sinner,  went 
home  justified,  enjoying,  that  is,  the  sense  of  the  Divine 
acceptance,  rather  than  the  Pharisee,  who,  contrasting 
himself  with  the  rest  of  mankind,  boasts  of  his  blameless 


TEACHING  OF  JESUS  ON  PRAYER  103 

standard  of  life  and  scrupulous  fulfilment  of  religious 
observances.  This  view,  that  a  man  must  not  plead 
any  merits  of  his  own,  familiar  as  it  is  to  us,  went  quite 
beyond  current  Jewish  conceptions. 

(iii)  Further,  He  taught,  as  we  have  seen,  that  as  (iii)AFor 
a  condition  of  receiving  the  Divine  pardon  men  in  their  giving 
turn  must  be  ready  to  forgive  the  offences  of  others.  sPlrit- 
St.  Matthew  mentions  that  Jesus  called  special  attention 
to  this  condition  attached  in  the  Lord's  Prayer  to  the 
petition  for  forgiveness.     On  another  occasion  He  illus- 
trated the  same  law  by  the  Parable  of  the  Unmerciful  Matt.xviii. 
Servant.  21-35. 

(iv)  Finally,  He  insisted  that  all  prayer  to  be  effectual  (iv)  Faith, 
must  be  offered  in  faith  ;  man,  that  is,  must  be  fully 
assured  that  his  prayer  will  be  heard  by  his  heavenly 
Father,  and  granted  in  the  way  that  shall  be  for  his 
truest  good.     He  declared  that  to  one  who  had  this 
absolute  trust  in  God  nothing  should  be  impossible ;  he  Matt,  xvii 
would,  He  affirmed,  using  a  paradoxical  saying  common,  20. 
it  would  seem,  in  the  Jewish  schools,  if  he  had  faith  ^uke  xvii- 
as  a  grain  of  mustard  seed,  be  able  to  uproot  trees  or 
remove   mountains  :    '  Therefore   I   say  unto   you,  All  Mark  xi. 
things  whatsoever  ye  pray  and  ask   for,  believe   that  24. 
ye  have  received  them,  and  ye  shall  have  them.' 


CHAPTER    VI 
THE  OPPOSITION  TO  JESUS 

Causes  of  Offence:  (i)  The  Claim  to  forgive  Sins  (Healing  of 
Paralytic). —  (ii)  Intercourse  with  Outcasts  of  Society  (Call 
of  Levi,  Zacchaeus,  Parables  of  Lost  Sheep,  Lost  Coin, 
and  Lost  Son;  Parables  of  Great  Supper  and  Wedding 
Feast,  Anointing  in  House  of  a  Pharisee). —  (iii)  Attitude  as 
to  Fasting  (Parables  of  Garment  andWine-skins).— (iv)  Heal- 
ings on  the  Sabbath. 

Mark  ii.  1— iii.  6;  Matthew  ix.  1-17,  xii.  1-14,  xxii. 
1-14 ;  Luke  v.  17-39,  vi.  1-11,  vii.  36-50,  xiii.  10-17, 
xiv.  1-6,  12-24,  xv,  xix.  1-10. 

The  Period  The  section  which  succeeds  in  the  Marcan  outline 
of  Conflict.  deals  mainly  with  the  points  in  which  the  conduct  of 
Jesus  aroused  the  opposition  of  the  religious  leaders 
of  the  nation.  It  has  for  this  reason  been  commonly 
called  'The  period  of  conflict.'  It  is  not  necessary 
indeed  to  suppose  that  the  events  are  given  by  St.  Mark 
in  actual  chronological  sequence.  He  seems  rather  to 
be  here  grouping  together  the  main  controversies  which 
arose  between  Jesus  and  His  opponents  in  the  course 
of  His  ministry,  illustrating  in  each  case  the  points  of 
dispute  by  reference  to  some  act  of  Jesus  which  called 
forth  their  censure. 

It  was  only  natural  that  the  outburst  of  popularity 
which  had  welcomed  this  new  Teacher,  trained  in  none 
of  the  Rabbinic  schools,  should  arouse  the  suspicions 


THE  OPPOSITION  TO  JESUS  105 

of  the  local  Scribes;  and  almost  from  the  first  they 
seem  to  have  kept  a  close  watch  upon  His  proceedings. 
From  this  time  the  breach  between  Jesus  and  the 
religious  leaders  continued  to  grow  ever  wider  and  more 
irreparable. 

St.  Mark  brings  out  clearly  the  four  chief  points  in  First 
the   conduct   of  Jesus   to   which   His   opponents  took  0fQHgence 
exception.      On   His   return   to   Capernaum   the   news  The  Claim 
spread  quickly  that  He  was  '  at  home,'  and  crowds  came  g°jfgrsive 
together ;  these,  however,  now  consisted,  not  merely  of 
those  who  sought  from  Him  the  cure  of  diseases,  but 
also  of  others  who  were  attracted  by  His  teaching. 

On  one  occasion  the  crowds  had  filled  the  courtyard  The  Heal- 
of  the  house  where  He  was  teaching  :  and  for  the  first  p^alyticT 
time  particular   mention  is  made   of   the   presence   of  Mark  ii. 
Pharisees  and  Scribes,  who  had  come  to  watch  Him.  M~att'  -x 
These  were,  St.  Luke  states,  not  merely  local  Scribes,  1-8. 
but  those  who  had  gathered  from  all  Galilee,  Judaea,  i^V 
and  Jerusalem.     From  this  it  would   appear   that   a 
deputation  had  been  sent  from  the  capital  to  observe 
and  report  on  the  proceedings  of  Jesus.     While  He  was 
thus  engaged,  four  men,  bearing  on  a  mattress  a  man 
suffering  from  paralysis,  sought  to  gain  access.    Finding 
that  the  crush  rendered  this  impossible,  they  went  up 
to  the  flat  roof  and  let  the  man  down  into  the  courtyard 
before  Him.     Jesus,  seeing  their  faith  and  recognizing, 
it  would  seem,  in  the  man  the  consciousness  that  his 
present  state  was  due  to  his  own  past  sin,  first  greeted 
him  with  the  assurance,  '  Child,  be  of  good  cheer ;  |  thy 
sins  are  forgiven.'     The  effect  of  such  an  announcement 
on  the  Scribes,  who  were  sitting  by,  was  immediate : 
the  whisper  passed  from  mouth  to  mouth,  'Why  doth 
this  man  thus  speak  ?    He  blasphemeth  :   who  can  for- 
give sins  but  one,  even  God  ? '     Jesus  at  once  discerned 


106  OUTLINES  OF  THE  SYNOPTIC  RECORD 


and  answered  the  suppressed  challenge :  Which  did  they 
think,  He  asked,  was  easier  to  cure,  moral  or  physical 
ill  ?  They  indeed  asserted  that  the  power  to  forgive 
sins  belonged  only  to  God  in  heaven;  yet  He  would 
prove  incontestably  to  them  that  such  authority  rested 
even  on  earth  with  the  Son  of  Man,  the  representative 
of  men;  thereupon,  turning  to  the  paralysed  man,  He 
bade  him  take  up  his  bed  and  walk.  All  three  Gospels 
preserve  the  abrupt  change  of  construction  ('but  that 
ye  may  know  ...  I  say  unto  thee'),  which  can  only  be 
accounted  for  by  the  existence  of  a  common  document. 
The  man  at  once  rose  up  and  passed  out,  carrying  his 
mattress,  in  proof  of  his  complete  restoration  to  health 
and  strength.  This  miracle,  so  remarkable  both  from 
its  character  and  its  circumstances,  produced  the  most 
intense  impression,  and  filled  the  beholders  with  mingled 
feelings  of  awe  and  amazement. 

Here,  then,  we  have,  in  the  claim  made  by  Jesus 
to  the  right  of  pronouncing  forgiveness  of  sins,  the  first 
ground  of  offence  which  He  gave  to  the  ruling  classes. 
It  is  important  to  notice  that  He  clearly  shows  that 
He  does  not  in  this  case  base  His  claim  on  any  unique 
Divine  prerogative,  but  asserts  that  the  authority  to 
'forgive  sins'  was  committed  to  Him  as  Son  of  Man, 
and  therefore  in  view  of  the  special  position  which  He 
held  as  a  Man  among  men. 

But  there  was  another  point  in  which  the  conduct  of 
Jesus  caused  still  greater  offence  to  the  prejudices  of 
the  religious  authorities  of  the  day,  and  which  betrayed 
Jesus  with  most  clearly  the  deep  line  of  cleavage  which  separated 
Outcasts  of  Him  from  them.     This  was  found  in  His  deliberately 
16  y'      seeking    out    those    who    were   regarded   as   the   most 
degraded  members  of  the  community,  and  contemptu- 
ously classed  as  'publicans  and  sinners.'     Jesus'  line 


Second 
Cause  of 
Offence. 
Inter- 


THE  OPPOSITION  TO  JESUS  107 

of  policy  in  reference  to  these  men  was  clearly  shown 
by  a  step  which  He  seems  to  have  taken  about  this  time. 
One  day,  while  walking  by  the  Sea  of  Galilee,  He  called  The  Call 
Levi   or  Matthew,  a  publican,  to  leave  his  toll-house,  MarkTi 
where  he  was  sitting,  and  follow  Him.     We  shall  recog-  13-17. 
nize  what  this  act  meant,  if  we  consider  the  estimation  9_23 ' 1X' 
in  which  men  of  his  profession  were  generally  held.  Luke  v. 

The   publicans,  or  tax-gatherers,  were  hated  by  the     ~    ' 
Jews  of  the  day  alike  on  account  of  the  unpopular  and  iicans, 
unpatriotic  character  of  their  calling,  and  the  reputation 
for  extortion  and  dishonesty,  to  which  the  system,  pre- 
valent in  Palestine,  of  farming  the  taxes  and  customs 
naturally  gave  rise.     With   them  were   classed  in   the 
estimation    of    their    stricter    fellow   countrymen  '  the  < The 
sinners' — a  term  which   included  all  those  Jews  who  Sinners-' 
disregarded  the  recognized  practices  of  orthodox  Judaism, 
and    mixed   freely   with   Gentile   society.     This   whole 
class  was  excluded  from  the  synagogues  and  all  other 
religious  assemblies,  being  regarded  by  the  Scribes  as 
practically  excommunicate.     Jesus,  however,  from  the 
first  made  it  a  primary  object  of  His  ministry  to  address 
Himself  to  this  section  of  the  nation,  which  was  passed 
over  by  all  other  religious  teachers,  and  to  seek  to  raise 
it  from  its  fallen   condition.     He,  for   the   first   time, 
brought  to  these  men  the  assurance  of  the  care  and 
pardoning  love  of  God.     By  the  call  of  one  of  their 
number  into  the  circle  of  His  own  disciples,  He  probably 
intended  to  gain  an  opening  for  more  direct  and  personal 
intercourse  with  them.     Such  an  opportunity  was  soon 
afforded  Him  by  a  feast  made  by  Levi  in  His  honour, 
to   which  he   invited   a   large   number    of    his   former 
associates.     By   sitting   down  in  such  company  Jesus 
acted  in  deliberate  defiance  of  Pharisaic  prejudices,  and 
naturally  such  a  violation  of  religious  conventions  did 


108   OUTLINES  OF  THE  SYNOPTIC  RECORD 

not  pass  without  a  protest.  The  Scribes  of  the  Phari- 
saic party,  addressing  their  remonstrance  to  His  disciples, 
exclaimed,  '  He  eateth  and  drinketh  with  publicans  and 
sinners.'  The  reply  of  Jesus  went  to  the  very  root 
of  His  principle  of  dealing  with  sin.  He  showed  that 
He  as  a  physician  was  sent  to  those  who  needed  His 
treatment,  and  not  to  men  who  regarded  themselves 
as  already  righteous ;  since  the  very  purpose  of  His 
coming  was  to  call  sinners.  To  attain  this  He  would 
not  shrink  from  the  ceremonial  defilement  which  inter- 
course with  these  men  was  held  to  involve ;  and  in  this 
He  was,  He  declared,  only  carrying  out  the  principle 
of  Divine  dealing  laid  down  in  the  saying  of  Hosea, 
Hos.  vi.  6.  '  I  desire  mercy,  and  not  sacrifice.' 

The  intercourse  of  Jesus  with  these  outcasts  of  society 
assumes  a  specially  prominent  place  in  St.  Luke's  Gospel. 
Possibly  he  may  have  had  access  to  some  source,  in 
which  were  collected  incidents  and  sayings  illustrating 
the  attitude  of  Jesus  to  this  class ;  though  some,  at  any 
rate,  of  this  matter  in  his  Gospel  may  be  drawn  from 
the  Logia. 
Zacchaeus.      Describing  the  last  journey  to  Jerusalem,  he  mentions 
I^Iq6  X1X'   the  Y^  °^  Jesus  to  the  house  of  Zacchaeus,  the  chief 
publican  of  Jericho.    His  action  in  this  instance,  though 
it  called  forth  the  usual  murmurs  of  disapproval,  was 
justified  by  the   result,  since  Zacchaeus  publicly   pro- 
claimed his  resolve  to  make  amends  for  any  past  wrong- 
doing by  giving  half  his  goods  to  the  poor,  and  making 
fourfold  restitution  to  any  whom   he  had   defrauded. 
Jesus,  convinced  of  the  man's  sincerity,  declared  that 
salvation  had  that  day  come  to  the  house,  since  the 
publican  too  had  shown  himself  a  true  son  of  Abraham. 
Parables         St.  Luke's  Gospel  contains  a  group  of  three  parables, 
Sheep L°St  tlie  Lost  SheeP>  the  Lost  Coin>  and  the  Lost  Son>  which 


THE  OPPOSITION  TO  JESUS  109 

were  spoken  in  answer  to  a  similar  complaint  of  the  Luke  xv. 

Pharisees.     Of  these  the  first  two,  which  form  a  pair,  ^a*t  xviU 

treat  mainly  of  the  dealings  of  God  with  sinners.     The  12-14. 

first  is  also  found  in  St.  Matthew,  where  it  is  applied 

to  the  reverence  due  to  children.     Its  central  thought 

is  the  love  of  God  for  each  individual  man  :  so  that  not 

one  out  of  the  whole   number  is   neglected   by  Him. 

The  corresponding  parable,  the  Lost   Coin,  illustrates  The  Lost 

the  unwearied  perseverance  of  God  in  seeking  to  recover  jj^  xv 

each  sinner,  since  every  single  soul  is  of  value  in  His  8-10. 

estimation. 

The  third  parable,  of  the  Lost  Son,  treats  the  same  The  Last 
truth  primarily  from  the   side  of   man.     It  differs  in  L^e  xv 
style  from  the  preceding  pair,  since  here  the  lesson  is  11-32. 
set  forth  in  a  graphic  and  detailed  narrative.     In  the 
experiences  of  the  prodigal  is  traced  out  the  gradual 
downfall,  repentance,  and   amendment  of  the   sinner; 
while  in  the  father's  reception  we  are  shown  the  readi- 
ness with  which  God  welcomes  the  penitent. 

But  Jesus  added  a  further  application  to  the  story  : 
by  the  jealous  conduct  of  the  elder  brother  He  illustrated 
the  narrow  intolerant  spirit  shown  by  the  Pharisees  in 
their  complaints  of  His  own  conduct  to  the  publican 
class. 

It  may  be  well  to  collect  here  some  further  passages, 
chiefly  from  St.  Luke,  illustrating  the  subject  of  the 
dealing  of  Jesus  with  the  outcasts  of  society  and  His 
teaching  on  God's  treatment  of  sinners. 

St.  Luke  relates  that  on  one  occasion  He  was  a  guest  At  the 
at  the  house  of  one  of  the  chief  Pharisees.     During  the  Pharisee  * 
meal  He  addressed  His  host,  and  told  him  that  he  should  Luke  xiv. 
not  be  content  to  show  hospitality  only  to  the  members  " 

of  his  own  class.     He  should  invite  the  poor  and  suffer- 
ing, from  whom  no  return  of  the  invitation  could  be 


110  OUTLINES  OF  THE  SYNOPTIC  RECORD 

expected :  though  a  return  should  indeed  be  made  him 
'  in  the  resurrection  of  the  just.' 

Thereupon,  one  of   the   guests,  anxious   perhaps  to 
change  the  subject,  interrupted  Him  with  the  ejacula- 
tion, '  Blessed  is  he  that  shall  eat  bread  in  the  kingdom 
Parable  of  of  God.'     Jesus  took  up  the  interruption,  and  showed 
Supper^  by  a  parable  that  those  who  thu3  professed  anxiety  to 
Luke  xiv.   feast  in  the  Kingdom  of  the  Messiah  were  yet  rejecting 
the  invitation,  when  it  was   now  presented   to   them. 
A  certain  man  made  a  great  feast  to  which  he  issued 
many  invitations :  when  the  day  arrived,  according  to 
the  usual  practice,  he  sent  to  summon  the  invited  guests ; 
yet  all  those  who  had  formerly  accepted  pleaded  one 
excuse  or  another  for  non-appearance.     Thereupon,  the 
host  in  hot  anger  sent  out  into  the  lowest  quarters  of 
the  city,  and  compelled  the  poorest  and  most  miserable 
to  come  to  the  feast,  declaring  that  none  of  the  original 
guests  should  be  admitted.     There  was  no  mistaking 
the   application   of    the   parable.     The   Pharisees   pro- 
fessed to  be  looking  eagerly  for  the  blessings  of  the 
Messianic  age :  yet  now  that  these  were  actually  offered 
to  them  by  Jesus,  they  found  various  pleas  for  rejecting 
Him  and  refusing  His  invitation.     Jesus  declared  there- 
fore that  the  summons   which  they  had  slighted  was 
now  transferred  to  the  publicans  and  sinners ;  and  that 
the  Pharisees  themselves  should  be  henceforth  excluded 
from  the  Kingdom  of  the  Messiah. 
St.  Mat-         This  or  a  very  similar  parable  is  placed  by  St.  Matthew 
sionV'rtir"  *n  ^ie  grouP  °f  parables  spoken  in  the  temple  in  the  last 
Parable,     week  of  the  ministry.      It  follows  immediately  on  that 
Matt.  xxn.    £  the  wicked  Husbandmen,  with  which  it  is  connected 

1-14.  ' 

in  subject.  Here,  too,  it  is  addressed  to  the  Pharisees. 
The  parable  in  St.  Matthew  is  probably  another  version 
of    that  in  St.  Luke,    though   it  is   given  with   con- 


THE  OPPOSITION  TO  JESUS  111 

siderable  variations  of  detail.  Here  the  occasion  is  a 
wedding  feast,  made  by  a  king  for  his  son  :  the  summons 
to  the  invited  guests  is  sent  twice :  and  on  its  second 
arrival  some  maltreat  and  kill  the  servants  sent  :  the 
king  in  revenge  sends  out  his  armies,  and  destroys  the 
murderers,  and  burns  their  city. 

It  is  possible  that  the  parable  has  been  modified  by 
the  author  of  our  First  Gospel  to  suit  the  position  which 
he  gives  it,  at  the  last  Passover,  when  the  hierarchy 
were  at  the  time  laying  plots  to  kill  Jesus. 

But  he  appends  a  further  incident  to  the  story.  After 
the  guests  of  every  condition  have  been  collected  from 
all  quarters,  the  king  on  entering  notices  one  who  has 
failed  to  provide  himself  with  suitable  apparel  for  the 
wedding.  The  man,  having  no  excuse  to  offer  for  such 
want  of  courtesy,  is  ignominiously  expelled  and  cast 
into  prison. 

This  last  incident  certainly  seems  inconsistent  with 
the  earlier  portion  of  the  parable,  which  represents  the 
guests  as  men  of  the  lowest  class,  who  had  been  brought 
in  straight  from  the  highways,  and  had  had  apparently 
no  opportunity  for  making  any  preparation,  even~[if 
such  had  been  possible  for  those  of  their  condition. 
The  incident  also  introduces  a  lesson  quite  distinct  from 
that  of  the  earlier  part  of  the  parable.  This  is  contrary 
to  the  usual  practice  of  Jesus,  whose  parables  always 
contained  but  one  central  lesson. 

It  seems  probable  therefore  that  we  have  here  a  pair 
of  parables,  such  as  we  find  not  uncommonly  in  the 
Gospels.  These  have  been  combined  by  St.  Matthew, 
or  his  source,  into  one  parable,  a  confusion  perhaps  due 
to  the  fact  that  both  had  reference  to  a  wedding  feast. 
Of  these  the  first  conveyed  the  same  lesson  as  the 
parable  in  St.  Luke;    while  the  second  showed  that, 


112  OUTLINES  OF  THE  SYNOPTIC  RECORD 

though  publicans  and  sinners  would  be  invited,  they 

must  put  on  the  garment  of  righteousness,  if  they  were 

to  share  in  the  feast. 

Anointing      Mention  may  here  be  made  of  a  singularly  beautiful 

^  a  incident,  preserved  by  St.  Luke,  illustrating  the  tender- 

who  was  a  ness  of  Jesus  towards  the  fallen.     He  had  on  one  occa- 

Sinner.'      gjon  Deen  invited  to  a  feast  by  a  Pharisee :  during  the 

Luke  vn. 

36-50.        meal  a  woman  of  ill  fame,  whose  heart  had  probably 

been  touched  by  His  teaching,  came  and  stood  behind 
His  couch,  and  poured  over  His  feet  a  phial  of  ointment ; 
as  she  did  so,  she  bedewed  His  feet  with  her  tears 
of  penitence,  which  she  wiped  away  with  her  hair. 
The  Pharisee  argued  in  his  own  mind  that  Jesus  must 
lack  prophetic  insight,  for  had  He  known  the  character 
which  the  woman  bore  He  would  never  have  allowed 
Himself  to  be  contaminated  by  her  touch.  Jesus  an- 
swered his  unspoken  thoughts  by  putting  before  him  an 
analogy :  which  of  two  debtors,  He  asked,  would  feel 
most  gratitude  to  his  master  for  remission  of  his  debt, 
he  who  owed  a  large,  or  he  who  owed  only  a  compara- 
tively trifling  amount  ?  The  Pharisee  could  not  avoid 
the  obvious  answer :  Jesus  thereupon,  turning  to  the 
woman,  contrasted  her  act  of  enthusiastic  devotion 
with  the  cold  reception  accorded  to  Him  by  His  host. 
This  woman,  he  declared,  despite  her  many  past  sins, 
had  yet  received  forgiveness  :  for  her  act  of  love  was 
proof  of  her  sense  of  gratitude  to  the  Divine  mercy. 
A  man  such  as  the  Pharisee  had  no  real  sense 
of  sin,  and  so  no  genuine  gratitude  for  forgiveness. 
Jesus  then,  addressing  the  woman  directly,  gave  her 
the  same  assurance  of  pardon  which  He  had  given  to 
the  paralytic  :  '  Thy  sins  are  forgiven.'  Without 
directly  answering  the  suppressed  murmur  of  His  fellow 
guests,  '  Who  is  this  that  even  forgiveth  sins  % '   He  dis- 


THE  OPPOSITION  TO  JESUS  113 

missed  her  with  the  words,  '  Thy  faith  hath  saved  thee  ; 
go  in  peace.' 

The  whole  incident  is  significant.  It  involved  both 
of  the  first  two  grounds  of  conflict  between  Jesus  and 
the  Pharisees,  His  claim  to  forgive  sins,  and  His  readi- 
ness to  receive  the  fallen  and  outcast  class.  These  two 
first  causes  of  offence  were  closely  connected  together. 
Jesus'  proclamation  of  a  forgiveness  within  the  reach 
of  all  attracted  to  Him  the  outcast  class.  And  He  felt 
that  He  had  a  special  mission  to  these  men,  who  were 
generally  regarded  as  beyond  the  pale  of  the  Divine 
mercy. 

The  third  ground  of  controversy  between  Jesus  and  Third 
the  Pharisees  had  to  do  with   the  observance  of  the  offeree 
outward  ordinances  of  religion.     The  particular  point  Contro- 
at  issue  was  the  question  of  fasting.     There  was  only  JJ^Jfni 
one  fast  commanded   in   the   law,  the   great   Day   of  Mark  ii. 
Atonement ;  but  it  was  the  practice  of  the  strict  Jews  jj~tt"*jx 
of  the  time  to  fast  also  on  Mondays  and  Thursdays.  14-17. 
On  the  occasion  of  one  of  these  weekly  fasts  some  of  33_39V' 
the  disciples  of  John  and  of  the  Pharisees  asked  Jesus 
why  His  disciples  were  less  strict  than  themselves  in 
this  respect.     Jesus  in  His  reply  laid  down  the  true 
principle  on  which  such  observances  should  be  based. 
Using  the  metaphor  of  a  wedding,  He  said  that  His 
disciples  were   like   the  friends  in   attendance  on   the 
bridegroom,  who,   as  long   as  the   marriage  festivities 
lasted,  were  regarded  as  exempt  from  religious  obser- 
vances.     Thus,  while   He   was   with   them,    mourning 
would  for  them  be  unnatural  and  out  of  place.     But, 
He  added,  keeping  the  same  metaphor,   the  wedding 
festivities  could  not  last  for  ever ;  hereafter,  the  time  of 
separation  from  the  bridegroom  would  come  for  them, 
and  then  would  be  the  days  of  mourning.     The  words 

I 


114  OUTLINES  OF  THE  SYNOPTIC  RECORD 

used  (otolv  a-n-apOrj)  may  have  been  intended  to  fore- 
shadow to  them  even  then,  though  vaguely  and  in- 
directly, the  inevitable  issue  of  His  ministry.  By  this 
saying  Jesus  laid  down  the  great  principle  that  out- 
ward ordinances,  such  as  fasting,  were  not  to  be  a  matter 
of  fixed  times  and  seasons,  but  rather  the  natural 
expression  of  the  inward  feelings  of  the  heart.  Apart 
from  this,  such  ordinances  degenerate  inevitably  into 
formalism. 
Parables         Jesus  then  went  on  to  illustrate  the  difference  between 

of  GT'~  a   the  old  Jewish  dispensation  and  that  which  He  came  to 
ment  and  r 

Wine-  introduce  in  the  matter  of  such  outward  observances  by 
skins.  a  pa^,  Q£  parabieg  The  exact  interpretation  of  these 
is  a  matter  of  considerable  doubt,  but  their  general  drift 
is  fairly  clear.  He  first  uses  the  illustration  of  a  piece 
of  undressed  cloth,  which  when  sewn  to  an  old  garment 
only  causes  a  worse  rent.  He  meant  by  this  to  show 
that  His  teaching  was  not  to  be  a  mere  patch  to 
complete  the  worn-out  garment  of  Judaism.  The 
principles  of  Christianity  could  not  be  combined 
with  Jewish  forms,  and  the  result  of  such  an  attempt 
would  be  disastrous.  In  the  second  illustration  of 
newly  fermented  wine  being  poured  into  old  wine- 
skins, He  probably  meant  to  show  that  it  was  not 
His  aim  to  inculcate  on  the  disciples  of  the  Pharisees 
and  of  John  the  new  principles  in  which  He  trained  His 
own  disciples.  The  former  belonged  to  the  old  order  of 
things,  and  so  naturally  adhered  to  the  forms  of  the  old 
system.  The  attempt  to  force  on  them  the  larger  and 
more  liberal  principles  of  Jesus  would  be  fatal  in  its 
results.  Not  only  would  the  principles  themselves  be 
lost,  if  they  were  committed  to  men  whose  whole  past 
training  and  attitude  of  mind  rendered  them  unsuited 
to  give  them  expression,  but  the  personal  character  of 


THE  OPPOSITION  TO  JESUS  115 

the  men  themselves  would  suffer  by  the  attempt  to  insist 
upon  principles  of  life  which  they  were  incapable  of 
receiving.  The  new  teaching  of  Jesus  had  to  be  com- 
mitted to  men  of  fresh  open  natures,  untrammelled  by 
old  prejudices  and  past  education. 

Another  interpretation,  however,  of  the  second  saying 
is  sometimes  given.  Jesus  showed  thereby  that  the 
new  spirit  which  He  was  introducing,  having  a  fresh  life 
and  vigour  of  its  own,  required  to  find  expression  in 
new  outward  forms :  it  could  not  be  contained  in  the 
old  ritual  and  observances  of  Judaism :  to  attempt  so 
to  limit  it  would  be  fatal ;  the  new  wine  would  burst 
the  wine-skins  and  be  lost ;  the  new  teaching  and  the 
old  forms  would  both  alike  perish.  A  new  spirit  re- 
quired new  means  of  expression,  as  fresh  wine  must 
be  put  in  new  wine-skins. 

In  St.  Luke  is  appended  to  the  parable  a  pithy 
aphorism,  which  carries  the  teaching  one  point  further, 
showing  why  Jesus,  while  justifying  the  conduct  of  His 
own  disciples,  does  not  thereby  condemn  the  adherence 
of  the  disciples  of  John  to  the  older  practices  :  '  And  no  Luke  v.  39. 
man  having  drunk  old  wine  desire th  new  :  for  he  saith, 
The  old  is  good.'  The  words  explain  why  the  attitude 
adopted  by  the  Pharisees  and  the  disciples  of  John 
in  the  matter  was  natural.  Men  who  have  become 
accustomed  to  one  system  are  content  with  that  one, 
and  reluctant  therefore  to  adopt  the  principles  and 
usages  of  a  new  system. 

The  fourth  ground  of  complaint  urged  against  Jesus  Cause  0f 
by  the  Pharisees  was  the  alleged  violation  by  Himself  Offence. 
and  His   disciples   of   the  law   of   the   Sabbath.     The  f^Sab-'1 
conflict  on  this  question  of  Sabbath  observance  kept  bath, 
continually  recurring  throughout  the  ministry.     There  2^Ui.16. 

12 


116   OUTLINES  OF  THE  SYNOPTIC  RECORD 

Matt.  xii.    was    nothing    on    which     the    Rabbis    insisted    more 
1_u-  strictly  than  the  most  minute  regard  to  the  Sabbath 

Tjiik©  vi 

l-ll.  law.     The  subject  afforded  them  unlimited   scope   for 

casuistry  in  applying  the  law  to  every  possible  case 
which  could  arise ;  until  this  intricate  system  of  petty 
ordinances  had  made  the  Sabbath  an  intolerable  burden. 
In  opposition  to  this  whole  system  Jesus  asserted  the 
principle  that  the  day  of  rest  was  a  Divine  ordinance, 
intended  for  the  benefit,  physical  and  spiritual,  of  man- 
kind. This  He  showed  by  not  hesitating  to  perform 
cures  on  that  day,  as  well  as  by  His  direct  teaching  on 
the  subject. 

The  earliest  conflict  on  this  point  recorded  by  the 
Synoptists  arose  from  the  action  of  His  disciples.  One 
Sabbath  day,  as  they  were  walking  with  Jesus  through 
the  cornfields,  being  hungry,  they  began  to  pluck  and 
eat  ears  of  corn,  rubbing  them  in  their  hands  as  they 
went.  The  Pharisees,  who  were  following,  called  the 
attention  of  Jesus  to  this  breach  of  the  Rabbinic  law, 
which  regarded  plucking  the  ears  as  reaping,  and  rubbing 
them  as  threshing.  Jesus  in  reply,  without  contesting 
the  truth  of  their  charge  as  to  the  breach  of  the  law, 
justified   the   act   by  reference   to   an  Old  Testament 

l  Sam.  xxi.  precedent,  citing  the  case  of  David  eating  the  shew- 
bread.  The  fact  that  no  condemnation  had  been  passed 
on  his  action  conceded  the  principle  that  the  ceremonial 
law  must  give  way  in  cases  of  physical  necessity.  He 
supported  this  by  referring  to  the  saying  of  Hosea, 
quoted    before    in    defence    of    His    attitude    to    the 

Hos.  vi.  6.  outcast,  '  I  desire  mercy,  and  not  sacrifice ' ;  and  He 
further  reminded  them  that  the  priests,  too,  were  allowed 
on  the  Sabbath  to  perform  their  duties  in  the  temple, 
since  these  took  precedence  over  Sabbatical  regulations ; 
adding,  '  But  I  say  unto  you,  that  one  greater  than  the 


THE  OPPOSITION  TO  JESUS  117 

temple  is  here.'  He  then  summed  up  the  true  principle 
of  Sabbath  observance  in  two  pregnant  sayings — c  The 
sabbath  was  made  for  man,  and  not  man  for  the 
sabbath ; '  and  '  The  Son  of  Man  is  lord  even  of  the 
sabbath.'  By  the  first  of  these  He  showed  that  the 
sole  end  of  the  Sabbath  was  the  benefit  of  man,  and 
that  its  observance  should  serve  as  a  means  to  this 
object,  and  not  become  an  end  in  itself.  By  the  second 
He  claimed  for  Himself  as  representative  of  man  ('Son 
of  Man ' )  the  authority  to  carry  out  the  Sabbath  law 
in  its  true  spirit,  even  in  opposition  to  recognized 
tradition. 

St.  Mark  places  next  to  this  an  instance  of  Sabbath 
healing  which  may  probably  be  taken  as  typical  of 
many  others.  The  Pharisees  had  laid  a  trap  for  Jesus 
by  placing  in  a  prominent  place  in  a  synagogue  a  man 
with  his  hand  withered,  and  then  watched  to  see  if 
Jesus  would  heal  him.  He  at  once  detected  and  foiled 
their  schemes.  Having  called  the  man  out,  He  put  to 
them  the  question,  *  Is  it  lawful  on  the  sabbath  day  to 
do  good,  or  to  do  harm?  to  save  a  life,  or  to  kill  ? '  with 
unmistakable  allusion  to  their  own  plots  against  Him. 
Nay,  He  asked,  would  not  any  one  of  them  save  a 
beast  whose  life  was  in  danger  on  the  Sabbath  day  ? 
To  this  no  reply  was  possible  for  them.  He  then  bade 
the  man  merely  stretch  forth  his  hand,  which  was 
at  once  restored.  Thus  the  machinations  of  His  enemies 
were  completely  foiled,  since  Jesus  had  committed  no 
technical  breach  of  the  Sabbath  law  on  which  they 
could  lay  hold,  while  their  own  malicious  schemes  had 
been  clearly  exposed.  Driven  to  desperation  by  repeated 
failure,  they  realized  that  they  were  no  match  for  Jesus, 
and  that  nothing  short  of  His  death  could  destroy  His 
influence. 


118   OUTLINES  OF  THE  SYNOPTIC  RECORD 

Alliance  To  effect  this  they  even  turned  to  those  to  whom  they 
ofPhari-    naturallv  stood  in  most  direct  antagonism,  the  Hero- 

cppq    Wlfll 

Hero-         dians.     We  cannot  be  sure  at  how  early  a  period  in  the 

dians.        ministry  this  plot  took  definite  shape ;   for  it  is  quite 

possible  that  this  second  Sabbath  incident  is  placed  by 

St.  Mark  out  of  chronological  order,  as  he  is  here  dealing 

with  the  subject  of  Sabbath  controversies.    It  is  hardly 

likely  that  if  the  plot  to  murder  Jesus  had  been  formed 

so  early,  its  execution  should  have  been  so  long  delayed. 

Healing  of      St.  Luke  mentions  in  the  '  great  insertion '  two  other 

Woman      Sabbath  healings :   one  of  these,  the  cure  of  a  woman 

with  In-  f .    «      .  ti- 

firmity.      with  a  spirit  of  infirmity,  took  place  in  a  synagogue ; 

^uker.xiii-  the  other,  the  healing  of  a  dropsical  man,  he  places 
Healing  of at  tne  ^east  m  tne  nouse  oi  the  Pharisee  to  which 
Dropsical  reference  has  already  been  made.  The  circumstances 
Luke  xiv  m  D°th  cases  closely  resemble  those  at  the  healing 
16-  of  the  man  with  the  withered  hand:  in  each  instance 

we  have  similar  words  of  Jesus  as  to  rescuing  an  ox 
or  an  ass  on  the  Sabbath.  This  repetition  is  probably 
due  to  some  confusion  in  the  tradition,  as  it  is  unlikely, 
though  possible,  that  Jesus  made  use  of  the  same  illus- 
tration on  three  different  occasions. 
Summary.  Thus  we  have  seen  the  four  main  causes  which  led  to 
the  conflict  between  Jesus  and  the  ruling  classes  of  the 
Jews.  This  conflict  lasted  from  now  till  the  end  of  the 
ministry ;  and,  as  the  intensity  of  the  struggle  increased, 
its  final  issue  became  more  and  more  apparent.  It  may 
well  be  that  Jesus  Himself  had  realized  almost  from  the 
first  what  the  result  must  be.  At  any  rate  He  saw  that 
the  points  of  difference  between  Himself  and  His  oppo- 
nents were  radical,  going  to  the  cardinal  principles  of 
the  relationship  between  God  and  man.  The  religions 
of  Jesus  and  the  Pharisees  could  not  exist  side  by  side ; 
the  one  or  the  other  must  give  way. 


CHAPTER  VII 

THE   CALL   OF   THE   TWELVE 

Healings.  —  Appointment  of  the  Twelve.  —  Attempt  of  His 
Family  to  seize  Jesus. —  Charge  of  Pharisees.  —  Defensive 
Discourse. 

Mark  iii.  7-35 ;  Matthew  ix.  32-34,  x.  2-4,  xii.  15-37, 
46-50;  Luke  vi.  12-19,  viii.  19-21,  xi.  14-26. 

We  now  reach  the  most  active  and  busy  period  of  Crowds 
the  public  ministry  of  Jesus.     His  work  at  this  time  ro^H^t 
chiefly  lay  among  the  towns  on  the  western  shore  of  the  ings. 
Lake  of  Galilee.     How  widely  His  fame  had  already  y_^  m* 
spread  was  shown  by  the  gathering  of  crowds,  not  only  Matt.  xii. 
from  Galilee,  but  also  from  all  parts  of  Palestine,  from  J^ke'vi 
beyond  Jordan  on  the  east,  from  Idumaea  on  the  south,  17-19. 
and  Tyre  and  Sidon  in  the  north-west.     In  view  of  the 
pressure  of  the  sick,  who  continually  thronged  around 
Him  in  hope  of  a  cure,  Jesus  ordered  His  disciples  to 
have  a  small  boat   in  constant  attendance,  to  enable 
Him  to  escape,  when  necessary,  from  the  crowds.     His 
time   was   almost   entirely   absorbed   in  this  work   of 
healing.    In  pursuance  of  His  constant  practice,  already 
noticed,    of   repressing   all   premature   confessions,    He 
sternly  silenced  the  possessed,  when  they  would  have 
proclaimed  Him  to  be  the  Messiah.     St.  Matthew,  how- 
ever, who  seems  to  have  had  a  very  inadequate  concep- 
tion of  this  principle  of  reticence  in  communicating  His 


120    OUTLINES  OF  THE  SYNOPTIC  RECORD 


Isa.  xlii. 
1-4. 


Appoint- 
ment of 
the 
Twelve. 

Mark  iii. 
13-19. 
Matt.  x. 
2-4. 

Luke  vi. 
12-16. 


Luke  ix. 
57-62 l. 


Messianic  claims,  sees  in  this  policy  of  repression  a  fulfil- 
ment of  the  prophecy  of  Isaiah,  '  My  servant  shall  not 
strive  nor  cry  aloud :  neither  shall  any  one  hear  his 
voice  in  the  streets,'  &c. 

In  view  of  the  increasing  demands  upon  Him  and  the 
continual  presence  of  the  crowds,  Jesus  now  first  took 
the  step  of  forming  a  definite  band  of  twelve  of  His 
closest  followers  to  be  in  continual  attendance  on  His 
Person.  Even  before  this  time,  in  addition  to  the 
crowds  who  continually  gathered  round  Him,  and  came 
and  went  freely,  there  would  seem  to  have  been  a 
number  of  adherents,  who  had  attached  themselves 
more  or  less  closely,  and  accompanied  Him  from  place 
to  place.  We  have  already  met  frequent  reference  to 
*  disciples,'  and  the  term  must  be  understood  as  bearing 
different  meanings  according  to  the  circumstances. 
Sometimes  it  is  applied  in  this  wider  sense  to  the 
general  body  of  followers,  sometimes  to  the  few  to 
whom  a  definite  call  had  been  already  addressed. 

But  even  after  the  selection  of  the  Twelve,  we  find 
traces  of  the  existence,  side  by  side  with  them,  of  a  more 
extensive  band  of  disciples.  These,  too,  formed  a  re- 
stricted circle  consisting  of  those  who  had  received  a 
definite  summons  from  Jesus,  and  admission  to  their 
number  was  recognized  to  be  limited  to  those  thus 
called.  The  rich  young  ruler  was  invited  to  attach 
himself  to  the  number  of  these  disciples ;  and  St.  Luke 
records  the  case  of  three  aspirants  to  discipleship,  who 
either  volunteered  or  were  called  on  by  Jesus  to  join 
this  body.  Yet  from  this  time  forward  this  outer  circle 
stood  in  a  less  close  and  intimate  relationship  to  Jesus 
than  did  the  Twelve  whom  He  now  selected.  Thus  the 
choice  of  the  Twelve  marked  a  distinct  step  in  the 
1  See  p.  163. 


THE  CALL  OF  THE  TWELVE  121 

ministry  ;  and  Jesus  prepared  for  it  by  a  night  spent 
on  the  mountain-top  in  prayer  to  God.  Their  appoint- 
ment was  carried  out  by  a  double  process  of  selection. 
He  first  called  to  Him  a  certain  number  apart  from  the 
crowd, — '  whom  He  would,' — probably  members  of  the 
wider  body  of  disciples  to  which  we  have  referred,  and 
out  of  them  He  appointed  twelve,  for  immediate 
attendance  on  His  Person.  In  the  selection  of  these 
men  Jesus  had  two  distinct  purposes  in  view :  the  first 
of  these  was  personal  nearness  to  Him, '  that  they  might 
be  with  Him ' ;  they  were  to  be  in  a  special  sense  '  His 
disciples'  By  this  continual  association  with  Him, 
which  from  this  time  forward  seems  to  have  been 
unbroken,  they  were  to  be  trained  for  the  future  work 
which  lay  before  them  as  the  founders  of  His  Church. 
Not  only  would  they  have  an  opportunity  of  receiving 
more  direct  and  personal  attention  from  Jesus  than  He 
gave  to  the  crowds,  but  they  would  learn  even  more 
from  the  indirect  influence  of  His  character,  and  from 
being  constant  witnesses  of  His  methods  of  working, 
teaching,  and  dealing  with  men. 

But  Jesus  had  a  second  object  in  view  in  their  appoint- 
ment, distinct  from  that  of  personal  attendance  on  Him  ; 
this  was  '  that  He  might  send  them  forth  {Iva  aTrocrreWrj) ' 
to  act  as  His  emissaries  or  '  apostles '  ;  and  for  this 
mission  they  were  entrusted  with  two  distinct  functions, 
firstly  '  to  preach '  or  act  as  heralds  (Kypva-aetv),  by 
proclaiming  the  approach  of  the  Kingdom  of  Heaven, 
and  preparing  the  way  for  Jesus  in  the  villages  which 
He  intended  to  visit,  and  secondly  '  to  have  authority 
to  cast  out  the  demons.'  It  is  clear  indeed  from  the 
Gospels  that  they  were  not  actually  sent  out  on  this 
independent  mission  till  a  later  point  in  the  ministry : 
naturally,  it  had  to  be  preceded  by  a  period  of  close 


122    OUTLINES  OF  THE  SYNOPTIC  RECORD 


See 

Latham, 
Pastor 
Pastorum, 
p.  247. 


Further 
Pressure 
of  Crowds. 

Attempt 
of  His 
Family  to 
seize 
Jesus. 
Mark  iii. 
31-35. 


personal  association  with  Jesus  and  training  under  His 
eye.  In  connexion  with  this  appointment  they  received 
the  name  '  apostles,'  and  in  the  earliest  Gospel  tradition 
the  term  appears  to  be  used  in  a  strictly  limited  sense, 
only  in  reference  to  this  special  mission.  During  the 
life  of  Jesus  their  primary  function  was  that  of  'disciples,' 
learners. 

The  men  chosen  were,  with  the  exception  of  Judas 
from  Kerioth,  all  Galileans.  Probably  their  selection 
was  due  to  qualities  which  Jesus  had  already  marked 
in  them,  specially  fitting  them  for  the  work  which  He 
had  in  view. 

The  social  position  of  these  men  would  seem  to  be 
such  as  best  to  qualify  them  for  serving  the  purpose  for 
which  they  were  required.  They  were  not  drawn  from 
any  of  the  more  aristocratic  and  exclusive  religious 
sects,  but  yet  they  would  seem  to  have  been  raised 
a  stage  above  the  poorest  and  most  ignorant  peasants 
of  Galilee.  There  were,  strictly  speaking,  no  class  dis- 
tinctions, in  our  sense,  in  Palestine  at  this  time.  But 
we  may  say  that  the  Apostles  belonged  generally  to  the 
lower-middle  class  of  the  population,  consisting  of 
fishermen  and  handicraftsmen  ;  and  as  such  they  would 
in  Galilee,  the  thriving  commercial  centre  of  Palestine, 
be  brought  into  contact  with  the  largest  number  of  men 
of  various  stations  of  life  among  their  fellow  countrymen. 

After  this  the  crowds  again  returned;  and  so  great 
was  the  pressure  on  the  attention  of  Jesus  that  He  and 
His  disciples  had  not  even  leisure  to  eat. 

One  incident  related  by  St.  Mark  vividly  illustrates 
the  intensity  of  the  enthusiasm  aroused.  His  relations, 
quite  unable  to  understand  that  burning  enthusiasm  of 
their  Kinsman,  which  led  Him  to  devote  Himself  thus 
entirely  to  the  work  of  ministry  to  others,  even  to  the 


THE  CALL  OF  THE  TWELVE  123 

neglect  of  His  own  personal  needs,  and  attributing  it  Matt.  xii. 

to  fanaticism,  sought  to  seize  Him  as  mad.     It  was,  ^6-50.  ... 
•  &  '  Luke  vin. 

perhaps,  with  this  object  that  His  mother  and  brethren  19-21. 

tried  to  reach  Him,  but  could  not  draw  near  owing  to 

the  density  of   the  crowds  surrounding   Him.     When 

news  of  their  presence  was  reported  to  Jesus,  He  replied 

by  pointing  to  the  circle  of  His  disciples  which  surrounded 

Him,  and  declaring  that  whosoever  did  the  will  of  God 

should  be  accounted  His  brother,  sister,  and  mother. 

The  words  no  doubt  conveyed  an  implicit  censure  on 

the  conduct  of  His  relations,  who,  by  their  interposition, 

sought  to  hinder  the  doing  of  the  will  of  God ;  they 

further  made  plain  that  for  Him,  henceforward,  natural 

relationships  must  give  place  to  spiritual  ones. 

But  soon  Jesus  had  to  meet  a  charge  similar  to  that  Discour.se 
brought  by  His  own  family,  but  emanating  from  a  more  ^  charge 
hostile  quarter.     The  growing  success  of  His  ministry  of  Phari- 
naturally  exasperated   to   the   utmost   His  opponents.  ^^'k  m 
The  Scribes  from  Jerusalem,  unable  in  any  other  way  to  20-30. 
stem  the  tide  of  popular  enthusiasm  in  favour  of  the  32%4 1X* 
new  Teacher,  which  was  specially  aroused  by  the  cure  xii.  22-37. 
of  the  possessed,  sought  to  malign  the  power  shown  i4_26X1 
in  these  expulsions   of  evil  spirits  by  charging  Jesus 
with  being   in  league  with   the  powers  of   evil.     The 
Scribes,  it  must  be  remembered,  formed  the  recognized 
court  of  appeal,  with  whom  it  rested  to  pass  a  verdict 
of  censure  or  approval  upon  any  new  religious  move- 
ment.    Since,  therefore,  they  could  not  deny  or  explain 
away  the  miracles  of  Jesus,  they  sought  by  this  calumny 
to  undermine  His  influence  with  the  people  :  '  He  hath 
Beelzebub,  and,  By  the  prince  of  the  demons  casteth 
He  out  the  demons.' 

St.  Matthew  connects  this  charge  with  a  particular 
instance  of  the  cure  of  one  possessed. 


124    OUTLINES  OF  THE  SYNOPTIC  RECORD 

Jesus  met  the  accusation  by  showing  the  absurdity 
which  it  involved.  These  evil  spirits  were  themselves 
the  instruments  and  servants  of  Satan.  Thus,  in  ex- 
pelling them,  Satan  would  be  waging  war  upon  himself. 
A  kingdom  or  house  thus  divided  against  itself  could 
not  stand.  He  then  urged  another  argument :  if  He 
cast  out  demons  by  the  power  of  Beelzebub,  how  could 
they  account  for  the  expulsions  wrought  by  their  own 
pupils,  the  Jewish  exorcists  ?  The  accusation  which 
they  levelled  against  Jesus  of  being  aided  by  the  power 
of  evil  involved  the  confession  that  His  power  was 
different  in  character  to  theirs.  But  since  it  was  im- 
possible to  attribute  the  cures  to  Satan,  there  was 
only  one  alternative :  they  must  be  due  to  the  Spirit 
of  God.  Thus  the  overthrow  of  evil  which  such  ex- 
pulsion involved  was  a  clear  proof  that  the  finger  of 
God  was  working  through  Jesus,  and  that  the  Messianic 
Kingdom  had  indeed  appeared  among  them. 

This  He  illustrated  by  a  parable,  declaring  that 
now  Satan,  like  a  strong  man  armed,  was  being  expelled 
from  the  world,  which  he  had  too  long  usurped,  by  one 
stronger  than  he,  i.e.  Jesus,  the  Messiah.  Thus  with 
His  coming,  Jesus  declared,  the  eternal  warfare  between 
good  and  evil  was  brought  to  a  head.  Henceforth, 
in  that  contest  all  men  must  enlist  themselves  in  one 
of  the  opposing  hosts  ;  they  must  yield  allegiance  to  one 
power  or  the  other.  It  was  probably  in  illustration  of 
this  that  He  appended  the  following  somewhat  difficult 
parable.  He  describes  a  man  who,  having  expelled  one 
evil  spirit  from  his  heart,  finds  it  impossible  to  leave 
the  chamber  of  his  soul  empty,  and  introduces  seven 
other  spirits  still  more  vicious  than  the  original  one. 
So  too,  He  would  say,  no  man  can  leave  his  soul  un- 
tenanted.    He  must  be  possessed  by  an  active  spirit  of 


THE  CALL  OF  THE  TWELVE  125 

either  good  or  evil.  Henceforward  neutrality  was  im- 
possible ;  men  must  side  with  or  against  Jesus  :  ■  He 
that  is  not  with  Me  is  against  Me.'  Having  thus  refuted 
the  charge  of  blasphemy,  Jesus  went  on  to  denounce 
the  spirit  of  wilful  moral  blindness  which  the  attitude 
of  the  Pharisees  betrayed.  They  had  before  their  eyes 
the  clearest  proofs  of  the  presence  of  God's  Spirit  among 
them;  but  yet,  rather  than  acknowledge  good  in  one 
whom  they  hated,  they  deliberately  blinded  themselves 
to  the  evidences  of  it,  and  attributed  them  to  evil  influ- 
ences. Such  an  attitude  of  prejudice  Jesus  characterized 
as  blasphemy  against  the  Holy  Spirit.  Words  spoken 
against  Jesus  Himself  might  indeed  be  forgiven,  but 
the  blasphemy  against  the  Holy  Spirit,  that  is  to  say, 
the  wilful  malice  which  refused  to  recognize  good  and 
preferred  to  call  it  evil,  placed  one  who  was  in  such 
a  state  outside  the  pale  of  Divine  forgiveness ;  as  long 
as  a  man  remained  in  such  a  perverted  spiritual  con- 
dition, he  was  '  guilty  of  eternal  sin.' 

He  then  went  on  to  append  a  warning  as  to  the 
importance  attaching  to  words.  For,  since  in  the 
eternal  contest  between  good  and  evil  all  men  must 
range  themselves  on  one  side  or  the  other,  the  words 
of  men  served  to  show  on  which  side  they  were  enlisted, 
revealing,  as  they  did,  their  inward  character,  just  as 
the  fruit  shows  whether  the  tree  which  bears  it  is  good 
or  bad.  Those  whose  moral  judgement  had  become  so 
distorted  as  that  of  the  Pharisees  had  shown  itself  to 
be  were  incapable  of  speaking  good  things :  a  man 
drew  his  words  from  the  treasures  of  his  heart.  Hence 
men  would  hereafter  have  to  give  an  account  of  every 
idle  word  ;  for  by  their  words,  as  the  infallible  expression 
of  their  character,  the  final  verdict  would  be  passed  on 
their  lives  :  '  For  by  thy  words  thou  shalt  be  justified, 


126    OUTLINES  OF  THE  SYNOPTIC  RECORD 

and  by  thy  words  thou  shalt  be  condemned.'  Both 
St.  Matthew  and  St.  Luke  place  immediately  after  this 
the  discourse  of  Jesus  in  answer  to  the  demand  for  a 
sign  made  by  the  Scribes  and  Pharisees,  which  we  have 
discussed  elsewhere  l.  Possibly  the  two  discourses  were 
connected  in  the  Logia,  since  both  had  reference  to 
controversies  with  opponents. 

In  that  case  it  would  seem  that  the  short  saying 
appended  in  St.  Luke,  '  The  lamp  of  thy  body  is  thine 
eye,'  &c,  which  St.  Matthew  places  in  the  Sermon  on 
the  Mount,  has  reference  to  the  discourse  in  answer 
to  the  charge  of  being  in  league  with  the  powers  of  evil. 
Just  as  the  body  depends  for  its  light  on  the  eye,  so 
the  whole  character  depends  on  the  power  of  moral 
vision.  If  that  becomes,  as  in  the  case  of  the  Pharisees, 
too  blind  and  diseased  to  recognize  goodness,  the  entire 
spiritual  being  is  in  a  state  of  darkness :  while  if  that 
is  open  to  receive  light,  it  is  the  medium  through  which 
the  whole  character  is  illuminated. 

1  See  p.  179. 


CHAPTER   VIII 
THE  TEACHING  BY  PARABLES 

The  Parables :  their  Characteristics,  Subject,  Interpretation, 
Purpose. — Parables  of  Sower ;  Seed  growing  secretly  ;  Tares 
of  the  Field  and  Draw-net ;  Hidden  Treasure  and  Pearl  of 
Great  Price ;  Mustard  Seed  and  Leaven  ;  the  Instructed 
Scribe. 

Mark  iv.  1-34  ;  Matthew  xiii.  1-52  ;  Luke  viii.  4-18, 
xiii.  18-21 ;  John  xii.  38-41. 

We  now  reach  a  new  stage  in  the  preaching  of  Jesus.  Teaching 
He  had  resumed  His  teaching  by  the  lake-side,  and  on  b^es  ara" 
one  occasion,  a  large  crowd  having  as  usual  collected  to  Mark  iv. 
hear  Him,  He  entered  a  boat,  and  putting  out  a  little  ^att*    ... 
distance  spoke  to  the  people  assembled  on  the  shore.  1-52. 
The   address   which  He   delivered   on  this  occasion   is  4  ulge  V1U' 
represented  in  our  Gospels  as  having  consisted  entirely 
of  a  series  of  parables.     It  had,  indeed,  always  been 
the  common  practice  of  Jesus  to  clothe  His  teaching  in 
a  figurative  or  pictorial  form ;  yet  it  seems  to  be  clearly 
implied  that  the  exclusive  use  of  parable  at  this  point 
marked  in  some  way  a  new  departure  in  His  teaching. 
Thus  St.  Mark  especially  directs  attention  to  this  change 
of  method  by  the  general  statement  that  '  With  many  Mark  iv. 
such  parables  spake  He  the  word  unto  them,  as  they     '  34- 
were  able  to  hear  it :  and  without  a  parable  spake  He 
not  unto  them.'    Some  degree  of  surprise,  too,  is  implied 
in  the  question  which  the  disciples  subsequently  asked 


128     OUTLINES  OF  THE  SYNOPTIC  RECORD 


Matt,  xiii 
10. 


Charac- 
teristics 
of  the 
Parables 
of  Jesus. 


Him,  '  Why  speakest  Thou  unto  them  in  parables  ? '  as 
if  such  a  method  of  address  was  novel  and  unexpected. 
And  it  is  certainly  noticeable  that  from  this  time  forward 
such  a  form  of  teaching  is  much  more  prominent  than 
before  in  the  public  ministry  of  Jesus. 

It  will  be  well  first  to  consider  briefly  what  are  the 
most  noticeable  characteristics  of  the  parables  of  Jesus, 
before  trying  to  determine  what  conclusions  may  be 
formed  as  to  His  purpose  in  adopting  this  new  method 
of  teaching.  The  root  conception  of  the  term  irapafioXiq, 
from  TrapafidWuv,  is  that  of  placing  two  things  side  by 
side  for  the  purpose  of  comparison.  In  the  Old  Testa- 
ment the  Hebrew  word  Mashed,  which  is  generally  repre- 
sented in  the  LXX  by  7rapa(3okrj,  is  used  in  a  wide 
variety  of  senses,  for  a  proverb,  a  riddle,  a  parable,  or 
a  poem ;  but  in  every  case  containing,  in  some  way, 
the  idea  of  comparison.  In  the  New  Testament  the 
word  is  not  confined  to  what  we  generally  know  as 
'  the  parables,'  but  it  is  applied  to  any  kind  of  figurative 
expression  or  illustration  ;  as  by  our  Lord  Himself  in  the 
synagogue  at  Nazareth  (Luke  iv.  23),  'Doubtless  ye  will 
say  unto  Me  this  parable,  Physician,  heal  Thyself ' ;  or 
in  the  disciples'  question  as  to  the  meaning  of  the  saying 
concerning  meats  that  defile  (Matt.  xv.  15 ;  Mark  vii. 
17),  or  by  St.  Mark  (hi.  23)  of  the  figurative  saying  in 
the  preceding  discourse  as  to  '  Satan  casting  out  Satan.' 
But  in  our  modern  sense  by  '  the  parables '  we  generally 
mean  short  stories  and  illustrations,  taken  from  the 
incidents  and  sights  of  daily  life,  'which  present  in 
a  picturesque  and  vivid  way  some  leading  thought  or 
principle  which  is  capable  of  being  transferred  to  the 
higher  spiritual  life  of  man  V 

This  method  of  teaching  was  not  a  new  discovery  of 
1  Sanday,  Hastings'  B.D.,  vol.  ii.  p.  617. 


THE  TEACHING  BY  PARABLES  129 

Jesus,  but  one  which  He  found  ready  to  His  hand.  The 
apologue  had  always  been  a  familiar  means  of  instruc- 
tion to  the  Eastern  teacher,  suited  as  it  was  to  the 
oriental  mind,  which  inclines  naturally  to  pictorial  repre- 
sentation. It  was  commonly  employed  by  the  Jewish 
Rabbis  ;  but  in  the  mouth  of  Jesus  it  gained  a  new  force 
and  beauty,  and  was  raised  to  a  higher  level. 

With  regard  to  their  subjects,  the  parables  of  Jesus  The 
nearly  all  deal  with  one  theme,  *  the  Kingdom  of  Heaven,  S^xiect 
or  of  God,'  which  holds  so  prominent  a  place  in  His  Parables, 
discourses,    especially    from    this    point    onwards.     He  Matt,  xiii, 
refers  to  the  parables  as  containing  '  the  mysteries  of 
the  kingdom.'      He   sought   by   this   indirect   form   of 
instruction  to  correct  and  purify  the  popular  misconcep- 
tions on  the  subject  of  the  Kingdom,  thus  leading  men 
to  recognize  its  true  nature  and  character,  the  laws  by 
which  it  was  governed,  and  the  principles  and  methods 
by  which  it  was  established  in  the  world. 

The  subjects  of  the  parables  are  drawn  mainly  from 
those  common  events  and  scenes  of  everyday  life  which 
men  had  continually  before  their  eyes :  from  the  daily 
occupations  of  the  fisherman,  the  farmer,  or  the  house- 
wife, from  the  familiar  rites  of  a  Jewish  wedding,  or 
the  games  of  children.  In  this  way  Jesus  taught  men 
that  it  was  possible  to  learn  spiritual  lessons  from  the 
commonest  sights  of  life  ;  while  these  familiar  operations 
of  the  household  and  of  daily  toil,  which  men  would 
have  continually  before  them,  would  serve  as  a  constant 
reminder  to  those  who  had  heard  the  parable.  For  His 
disciples,  they  would  keep  ever  fresh  in  their  minds  the 
lessons  of  the  parable,  which  their  Master  had  explained 
to  them  privately ;  while  in  the  case  of  the  general 
body  of  hearers,  who  had  received  the  parable  without 
the  interpretation,  inquiring  minds  would  thus  be  en- 

K 


130    OUTLINES  OF  THE  SYNOPTIC  RECORD 

couraged  to  ponder  afresh  upon  its  meaning.  But  Jesus 
loved  especially  to  draw  His  lessons  from  the  processes 
of  nature,  often,  no  doubt,  pointing  to  sights  which 
lay  before  the  eyes  of  His  hearers  as  He  spoke.  He 
thereby  led  men  to  recognize  that  God's  methods  of 
working  in  the  spiritual  order  were  the  same  as  those 
universally  recognized  in  the  natural  world ;  they  could 
draw  their  conclusions  from  the  lower  to  the  higher 
sphere,  from  the  natural  to  the  spiritual,  from  the  known 
to  the  unknown.  The  popular  expectation  of  the 
Kingdom  of  the  Messiah,  that  it  was  to  appear  suddenly 
from  heaven,  fully  complete,  and  be  accepted  by  all 
alike,  without  any  effort  on  men's  part,  stood  self-con- 
demned, as  being  utterly  inconsistent  with  God's  estab- 
lished methods  of  working  as  shown  in  the  world  around 
them ;  rather  the  seed  of  Divine  revelation,  which  Jesus 
brought,  would  grow  on  the  same  principles,  and  be 
subject  to  the  same  conditions,  as  the  seed  sown  in  the 
earth. 

There  are,  however,  other  cases  in  which  He  probably 

drew  His   illustration  from   some  incident  which   had 

formed    a   subject   of   common   talk    at   the   time  (as, 

possibly,  in  the  Parable  of   the   Good   Samaritan),  or 

from  a  recent  event  in  the  national  history  (as  in  the 

Parable  of  the  Pounds). 

The  Inter-      A  comparison  of  the  parables  of  Jesus  will  at  once 

oftfoe10n    ma^e  it  plain  that  they  differ   considerably  in   form : 

Parables,    some  are  of  the  nature  rather  of  simple  illustrations, 

as    those    of    the   Lost    Sheep    or   the    Mustard    Seed, 

while  in  others  the  narrative  is  more  fully  worked  out 

in  the  form  of  a  story,  as  in  those  of  the  Prodigal  Son 

or  the  Great  Supper.     Hence  it  is  natural  to  conclude 

that  no  one  method  of  interpretation  can  hold  good 

for  all  alike.     The  commonest  are  those  already  men-" 


THE  TEACHING  BY  PARABLES  131 

tioned,  in  which  God's  principles  in  the  government  of 
the  world  are  illustrated  from  nature  or  from  daily  life, 
and  these  have  been  called  '  similitudes.' 

A  very  common,  in  fact  almost  universal,  feature  of 
these  similitudes  is  the  use  of  contrast,  e.g.  in  the 
Parables  of  the  Pharisee  and  the  Publican,  the  Rich 
Man  and  Lazarus,  the  Wise  and  Foolish  Virgins. 

It  is  a  special  form  of  this  method  of  contrast  where, 
by  a  sort  of  a  fortiori  argument,  He  draws  conclusions 
as  to  God's  treatment  of  mankind  from  the  conduct 
of  men,  most  unlike  to  Him  in  character,  in  their 
dealings  with  their  fellow  men.  Thus,  if  the  unjust 
judge  or  the  disobliging  friend  give  way  to  the  impor- 
tunity of  the  petitioner,  how  much  more  will  their 
heavenly  Father  give  ear  to  the  earnest  prayers  of  His 
own  children !  A  similar  principle  may  give  the  key 
to  the  difficult  Parable  of  the  Unrighteous  Steward. 
Here  a  man,  devoid  of  moral  scruples,  one  of  '  the  sons 
of  this  world,'  shows  in  his  dealings  in  regard  to  worldly 
concerns  a  practical  prudence  and  foresight  which  is  too 
often  wanting  in  regard  to  spiritual  things  in  professing 
followers  of  Jesus — '  the  sons  of  light.'  In  this  case  the 
story  is  told  of  '  an  unrighteous  steward ' ;  since,  had 
he  been  represented  as  a  just  man,  attention  might  have 
been  diverted  from  the  worldly  prudence,  which  is  the 
point  in  his  conduct  to  which  the  parable  would  draw 
attention. 

But  beside  these  similitudes,  intended  to  convey  only 
one  central  truth,  there  are  other  parables  which  seem 
to  fall  rather  under  the  head  of  allegories.  In  these  the 
various  details  of  the  story  are  not  a  mere  setting,  but 
each  one  contains  its  own  hidden  meaning.  Thus  in 
the  interpretation  of  the  parable  another  term  has  to 
be  substituted  in  each  case  for  the  one  used.     We  are 

K  2 


132    OUTLINES  OF  THE  SYNOPTIC  RECORD 

told  that  Jesus  was  in  the  habit  of  interpreting  the 
parables  privately  to  the  inner  circle  of  His  own  disciples. 
The  explanation  of  only  one  was  preserved  in  the 
Synoptic  Tradition,  that  of  the  Sower,  a  parable  which, 
in  all  our  records,  stands  first  of  the  series  spoken  on 
this  occasion.  St.  Matthew  gives  the  interpretation  of 
two  other  parables  peculiar  to  his  Gospel,  the  Tares 
in  the  Field  and  the  Draw-net.  Now  it  is  noticeable 
that  in  each  case  these  are  interpreted  as  allegories, 
every  figure  in  the  parable  being  given  its  own  spiritual 
meaning ;  thus,  in  the  Parable  of  the  Sower,  the  seed, 
the  different  kinds  of  soil,  the  birds,  the  thorns,  all 
have  their  own  corresponding  equivalent  in  the  inter- 
pretation. 

The  old  commentators  were  in  the  habit  of  attempting 
on  this  same  principle  to  interpret  all  the  parables  as 
allegories,  and  to  give  a  distinct  meaning  to  every  figure 
used  in  them.  This  method  of  interpretation  gave  full 
scope  to  critical  ingenuity,  but  in  the  case  of  some 
parables,  such  as  that  of  the  Unrighteous  Steward,  it 
caused  the  most  serious  difficulties. 

Many  modern  critics  deny  that  any  of  the  parables 
are  to  be  regarded  as  allegories,  and  hence  reject  the 
interpretations  given  by  the  Evangelists  as  being  un- 
historical  and  due  to  the  conceptions  of  a  later  age. 
Yet  the  interpretation  of  the  Parable  of  the  Sower  at 
any  rate  formed,  as  we  have  seen,  part  of  the  Marcan 
source.  On  the  whole  it  seems  probable  that  the  inter- 
pretations, as  we  have  them,  were  actually  given  by 
Mark  iv.  Jesus.  We  are  told  that  c  privately  to  His  own  disciples 
He  expounded  all  things ' ;  and  possibly  the  fact  that, 
in  the  case  of  these  parables,  the  explanation  was 
peculiarly  full  and  elaborate,  giving  its  own  meaning 
to  each  term  employed,  led  to  its  preservation  in  these 


34 


THE  TEACHING  BY  PARABLES  133 

instances,  while  the  others  were  left  to  speak  for  them- 
selves. 

But  while  it  is  allowed  that  certain  of  the  parables 
are  rightly  thus  interpreted  as  allegories,  it  would  appear 
that  even  these  always  contained  one  central  lesson, 
to  which  all  else  in  the  story  is  subsidiary.  This  central 
lesson  Jesus  often  summed  up  in  one  brief  sentence 
at  the  close  of  the  parable,  giving  thereby  a  key  to 
its  meaning :  as,  for  instance,  to  the  Parable  of  the 
Labourers  in  the  Vineyard  He  adds  (Matt.  xx.  16), 
'  So  the  last  shall  be  first,  and  the  first  last ' ;  to  the 
Great  Supper  (Matt.  xxii.  14),  '  For  many  are  called, 
but  few  chosen ' ;  to  the  Pounds  (Luke  xix.  26,  cf . 
Matt.  xxv.  29),  '  I  say  unto  you,  that  unto  every  one  that 
hath  shall  be  given ;  but  from  him  that  hath  not,  even 
that  which  he  hath  shall  be  taken  away  from  him.' 

We  have  now  to  consider  the  purpose  which  Jesus  Purpose 

had  in  view  in  the  use  of  parables.     We  can  see  at  once  ?f  Teach- 

ing  by 
that  this  form  of  address  was  suited  to  arrest  attention  Parables. 

and  render  His  teaching  more  interesting  and  attractive. 
Such  illustrations  are  a  familiar  expedient  of  the  open- 
air  teacher.  These  stories  from  everyday  life  would 
catch  and  hold  the  attention  of  the  men  who  came  and 
went  on  the  outskirts  of  an  Eastern  crowd.  In  many 
cases  they  appealed  to  the  eye  as  well  as  to  the  ear. 
Such  a  style  of  address  would  be  best  suited  to  the 
intelligence  of  the  simple  peasants  of  Galilee. 

But  our  Gospels  show  us  that  Jesus  had  a  further 
aim  in  this  use  of  parables  than  that  of  clothing  His 
teaching  in  a  simple  and  attractive  form.  Clearly  His 
disciples  perceived  that  He  had  some  less  obvious  reason 
than  this,  since  they  came  to  Him  afterwards  with  the 
question,  '  Why  speakest  Thou  unto  them  in  parables  ? '  Matt.  xiii. 
Jesus  replied  that  it  was  His  purpose  in  this  way  to  10- 


134    OUTLINES  OF  THE  SYNOPTIC  RECORD 

conceal  '  the  mysteries  of  the  kingdom '  from  the  multi- 
Mark  tude :  '  Unto  you  is  given  the  mystery  of  the  kingdom 
1V#  of  God  :  but  unto  them  that  are  without,  all  things  are 
done  in  parables.'  He  then  applied  to  His  own  teaching 
Isaiah  vi.  the  words  spoken  to  Isaiah  at  his  call,  declaring  that 
the  immediate  result  of  the  prophet's  ministry  would 
be  still  more  to  harden  and  blind  the  hearts  of  his 
hearers.  Thus  this  form  of  instruction  was,  according 
to  our  Lord's  own  statement,  intended  to  act  as  a  form 
of  judgement.  Up  to  this  point  His  teaching  had  con- 
sisted largely  of  short  pithy  sayings,  such  as  those 
we  find  in  the  Sermon  on  the  Mount,  impressing  them- 
selves on  the  memory,  sayings  which  all  alike  could 
understand  and  carry  away.  But  in  place  of  these  the 
multitudes  now  heard  a  story  of  everyday  life,  the 
meaning  of  which  did  not  lie  on  the  surface.  This  was 
interpreted  privately  by  Jesus  to  the  inner  circle  of  His 
own  disciples,  but  the  general  crowd — '  those  without ' — 
were  left  to  discover  its  lessons,  if  they  would,  for  them- 
selves. Thus,  for  them,  the  parables  in  this  way  acted 
as  a  sort  of  sifting  process,  distinguishing  between  the 
thoughtless  hearer,  drawn  by  mere  idle  curiosity,  and 
the  earnest  searcher  after  truth.  It  would  seem,  indeed, 
that  it  was  open  to  any  of  the  crowd  to  come  to  Jesus 
and  ask  to  have  the  parable  explained  to  them,  since 
St.  Mark  shows  that  the  circle  of  questioners  was  not 
confined  to  the  Twelve  (Mark  iv.  10 :  '  They  that  were 
about  Him  with  the  twelve'). 

The  parables  are  nearly  all  concerned  with  the  nature 
of  the  Kingdom  of  Heaven,  which  from  now  forms  the 
main  topic  of  the  public  preaching  of  Jesus.  He  per- 
ceived that  so  deep-seated  were  the  popular  miscon- 
ceptions with  regard  to  it  that  only  in  this  indirect  and 
pictorial  form  could  any  save  the  inner  circle  of  hearers 


THE  TEACHING  BY  PARABLES  135 

receive  instruction  on  the  subject.     This  is  the  meaning 
of  the  statement  that  He  spoke  the  word  to  them  in 
parables,  '  as  they  were  able  to  hear  it :   and  without  Mark  iv. 
a  parable  spake  He  not  unto  them  :  but  privately  to  His     ' 
own  disciples  He  expounded  all  things.' 

Thus  the  adoption  of  this  form  of  teaching  falls  in 
with  that  principle  of  withdrawal  from  the  crowd  to 
devote  Himself  more  exclusively  to  the  training  of  an 
inner  circle  of  disciples,  which  from  this  time  forward 
becomes  a  marked  feature  in  the  ministry  of  Jesus. 

In  this  way,  then,  the  parables  served  to  stimulate 
thought :  only  those  who  were  ready  to  take  trouble 
and  ponder  over  them  gained  an  insight  into  the  pro- 
found truths  which  they  conveyed;  but  to  these  the 
effort  brought  its  own  reward ;  for  Jesus  always  taught 
that  Divine  truth  cannot  be  received  without  effort  on 
men's  part,  and  that  they  profit  by  it  in  proportion  to 
the  pains  which  they  bestow  on  the  search.  The  un- 
receptive  hearers,  on  the  other  hand,  were  only  rendered 
thereby  more  blind  to  its  influence,  and  incurred  the 
greater  guilt  which  always  attaches  to  opportunities 
wasted.  Jesus  Himself  impressed  this  on  His  disciples 
by  adding  to  the  interpretation  given  to  them  of  the 
parables  a  warning  as  to  the  need  of  care  in  hearing, 
re-affirming  in  this  connexion  the  law  of  life,  '  With  Mark  iv. 
what  measure  ye  mete  it  shall  be  measured  unto  you :  ' 
and  more  shall  be  given  unto  you.  For  he  that  hath, 
to  him  shall  be  given  :  and  he  that  hath  not,  from  him 
shall  be  taken  away  even  that  which  he  hath.'  If  we 
adopt  the  form  of  the  quotation  from  Isaiah  given  by 
the  Synoptic  Gospels,  we  should  gather  that  this  conceal- 
ment of  truth  from  the  indifferent  was  not  only  a 
necessary  result,  but  also  a  deliberate  purpose  of  the 
procedure  of  Jesus.     The   same  quotation   is   used   in 


136    OUTLINES  OF  THE  SYNOPTIC  RECORD 

John  xii.  the  Fourth  Gospel  in  summing  up  the  results  of  the 
ministry.  It  is  there  shown  that  the  preaching  of 
Jesus  proved  for  men  an  automatic  process  of  judge- 
ment. It  acted  as  a  touchstone  revealing  the  true 
condition  of  the  heart,  and  so  served  to  draw  out  the 
latent  faith  or  unbelief  in  those  who  heard  it. 

It  is  possible  that,  as  Dr.  Sanday  suggests,  the  words 
are  out  of  place  in  the  mouth  of  Jesus  in  the  connexion 
given  them  in  the  Synoptic  Gospels,  and  should  be  put 
at  the  close  of  the  ministry,  where  they  occur  in  St.  John. 
Thus  they  may  be  regarded  as  showing  what  later 
experience  had  proved  to  be  the  result  of  the  teaching 
by  parables,  rather  than  the  actual  purpose  which  Jesus 
declared  at  the  time. 

To  sum  up,  then,  we  may  say  that  the  parables  served 

a  threefold  purpose :  (i)  To  arrest  the  attention  of  the 

crowd  and  render  the  teaching  attractive  and  interesting  ; 

(ii)  To  conceal  truth  from  the  idle  and  indifferent  hearers  ; 

(iii)  To  stimulate  reflection  in  the  earnest  and  thoughtful. 

We  need  not  conclude  that  all  of  the  group  of  parables, 

placed  in  the  different  Gospels  at  this  point,  were  spoken 

at  the  same  time,  though  they  all  deal  with  the  subject 

Pairs  of     of  '  the  Kingdom  of  God.'    Among  them  we  have  several 

Parables.    Qf  ^e  pairs  of  parables,  so  common  in  the  teaching  of 

Jesus,  each  illustrating  the  same  truth,  but  regarding  it 

from  a  different  point  of  view,  or  placing  it  in  a  different 

light. 

The  Jesus  began  His  teaching  with  the  Parable  of   the 

the  Sower  ^ower.    ^  tnis  He  exposed  the  fundamental  misconcep- 

Mark  iv.     tion  which  underlay  the  ideas  of  His  fellow  countrymen 

Matt  xiii    as   to  the  Kingdom   of   God.     Tnev  expected  that  it 

3-9.  would  be  set  up  from  without  by  a  single  Divine  act ; 

Luke  vin.   an(j  that  when  it  once  appeared  it  would  be  universally 

received  by  all  alike,  whatever  their  previous  spiritual 


THE  TEACHING  BY  PARABLES  137 

state.  Jesus,  using  the  analogy  of  the  process  of  sowing, 
showed  them  that  its  effect  would  not  be  thus  sudden 
and  complete,  but  would  vary  with  the  degrees  of 
receptivity  which  it  found  in  men's  hearts :  thus  its 
success  or  failure  would  depend  on  men  themselves. 
As  there  were  many  kinds  of  soil  in  which  the  seed  sown 
could  bear  no  fruit,  so  too  there  were  conditions  of 
heart  in  which  the  Word  could  produce  no  permanent 
effect.  In  this  parable  we  have  also  Jesus'  estimate  of 
the  result  of  His  preaching  up  to  this  point ;  He  now 
saw  clearly  that  it  would  not  be  received  by  the  mass  of 
the  people.  He  here  accounts  for  this  apparent  failure 
by  showing  that  the  cause  lay  not  in  the  Word  itself  or 
the  Preacher,  but  in  the  spiritual  state  of  the  hearers. 
By  mentioning  the  different  degrees  of  fertility  of  the 
good  soil,  He  showed  too  that  the  results  would  not  be 
the  same  even  in  those  who  did  receive  the  Word. 

St.  Mark  and  St.  Luke  state  that,  after  explaining  the  Saying  as 
parable  to  His  disciples,  Jesus  added  the  saying  that  ^ar^^" 
a  lamp  must  be  placed  so  as  to  show  its  light,  which  21-23. 
occurs  in  St.  Matthew  and  again  in  St.  Luke  in  a  different  1g1_1gVU1' 
connexion.    If  the  Marcan  connexion  is  right,  the  mean-  Cf.Mattv. 
ing  would  seem  to  be  that  though  for  a  time  indeed  L^e  xL 
'  the  mystery  of  the  Kingdom '  was  a  secret  entrusted  33. 
to  His  disciples  only,  yet  this  was  with  the  view  that 
hereafter  they  should  let  the  light  kindled  within  them 
shine  forth,  by  making  known  publicly  to  all  the  mean- 
ing of  the  truths  explained  to  them. 

St.  Mark  adds  here  the  Parable  of  the  Seed  growing  Parable  of 
secretly,  peculiar  to  his  Gospel.     This  contains  the  same  j^yin^ 
root  idea  as  the  preceding  parable :  that  the  setting  up  secretly. 
of  the  Kingdom  is  not  to  be  a  single  Divine  instantaneous  26*29.1V' 
act,  but  a  process  of  gradual  continuous  imperceptible 
growth.    But  here  the  point  emphasized  is  rather  that, 


138     OUTLINES  OF  THE  SYNOPTIC  RECORD 

as  the  farmer,  having  sown  the  seed  in  the  ground,  then 
leaves  it  to  grow  of  itself  until  the  time  of  harvest,  so 
after  the  Kingdom  has  been  once  brought  to  earth  by 
the  preaching  of  Jesus,  it  is  then  left  to  take  effect  in 
the  world  gradually  without  direct  Divine  interference 
with  its  development. 

It  has  been  sometimes  held  that  we  have  in  this 
parable  only  an  imperfect  edition  of  the  Parable  of  the 
Tares,  contained  in  St.  Matthew,  or  again  it  has  been 
suggested  that  the  two  were  regarded  by  that  Evangelist 
as  identical ;  but  though  they  have  in  common  the 
same  idea  that  God  allows  the  growth  of  the  Kingdom 
on  earth  to  take  its  natural  course  till  the  day  of 
'harvest,'  the  central  lesson  of  that  parable  is,  as  we 
shall  see,  different. 
The  The  Parables  of  the  Tares  in  the  Field  and  Draw- 

Parables     net}  which   are  found  only  in  St.  Matthew,  probably 
Tares  in     form  a  pair  of  parables,  though  they  are  separated  from 
the  ^jeld    each  other  as  they  stand  in  that  Gospel.     These  are  the 
Draw-net.  only  two  parables  besides  that  of  the  Sower  of  which 
M-att-  XU1-  the   explanation   has   been   preserved.     Jesus  aims   in 
47-50.'        them  at  removing  the  popular  idea  that  the  first  act 
of  the  Messiah  at  His  Coming  would  be  the  separation 
of  the  good  and  evil  in  the  nation,  '  the  purging  of  the 
threshing-floor'  spoken  of  by  John  the   Baptist,  and 
that  He  would  then  at  once  form  His  Kingdom  of  the 
worthy  members.     He  shows  that  this  separation  was 
not  to  take  place  immediately  ;  as  yet  all  were  admitted 
outwardly  into  the  Kingdom  of  God,  who  wished  to 
enter ;  no  further  questions  were  asked ;  but  at  present 
men  were  not  ripe  for  its  final  complete  establishment ; 
that  must  be  preceded  by  a  long  process  of  spiritual 
development,  during  which  the  good  and  evil  elements 
should  be  allowed  to  continue  side  by  side ;  it  was  only 


THE  TEACHING  BY  PARABLES  139 

when  this  process  was  complete  that  the  final  separation 
of  the  worthy  and  unworthy  could  take  place.  This  is 
the  meaning  of  the  Parable  of  the  Draw -net. 

The  Parable  of  the  Tares  in  the  Field  reveals  the 
same  truth,  but  carries  it  further.  There  this  inter- 
mixture of  good  and  evil  in  the  Kingdom  is  explained 
by  the  fact  that  there  are  other  unseen  agencies  con- 
tinually at  work  in  the  world  in  opposition  to  Jesus.  As 
yet  the  growth  of  good  and  evil  must  go  on  simul- 
taneously ;  and  meanwhile  the  two  are  so  inextricably 
intermingled  that  men  are  sure  to  fall  into  mistakes  in 
the  attempt  to  distinguish  them  ;  but  at  last  the  Divine 
separation  will  take  place,  when  the  true  character  of 
every  man  will  be  unerringly  revealed,  and  he  will  be 
judged  accordingly. 

In  another  pair  of  parables,  those   of   the  Hidden  Parables 
Treasure  and  Pearl  of  Great  Price,  Jesus  met  the  idea  bidden 
that  the  blessings  of  the  Kingdom  were  to  drop  into  Treasure 
men's  laps,   as  it  were,  of  their  own  accord,  so  that  p^arl  ® 
everything  was  to  be  done   for  them  and  they  should  Great 
be  able  to  enjoy  these  without  any  effort  or  sacrifice  on  jf"^"xH| 
their  part.     In  opposition  to  such  a  view  Jesus  shows  44  46. 
them  that  so  great  is  the  value  of  the  Kingdom,  that 
a  man  must  be  prepared  to  make  the  greatest  possible 
sacrifice  in  order  to  enter  it. 

A  slightly  different  shade  is  given  to  this  truth  in  the 
two  parables.  In  the  one  parable  a  man,  having  acci- 
dentally lighted  on  treasure  in  a  field  belonging  to 
another,  sells  all  in  order  to  purchase  the  field.  Here 
we  have  the  case  of  one  who  is  caught  unexpectedly  by 
the  preaching  of  Jesus  and  recognizes  its  true  worth ; 
he  must  then  be  prepared  to  sacrifice  all  to  become  His 
disciple.  In  the  other  instance  a  merchant  dealing  in 
pearls,  discovering  one  of  unique  value  in  the  hands  of 


140    OUTLINES  OF  THE  SYNOPTIC  RECORD 

fishers,  sells  all  that  he  has  to  become  its  possessor  :  so  a 
man  may  after  long  search  for  the  Kingdom  of  God  be 
led  to  recognize  its  coming  in  the  Person  of  Jesus,  and 
attach  himself  to  Him ;  in  that  case  he  too  must  be 
willing  to  give  up  everything  which  hinders  him  from 
becoming  Jesus'  disciple. 
The  The  Parables  of  the  Mustard  Seed  and  the  Leaven 

P£riabi?s     draw  out  the  same  truth  with  regard  to  the  character  of 
tard  Seed   the  Kingdom,  which  had  already  been  insisted  on  in  the 
Leaven6      Parame  °f  the  Sower :  that  it  was  not  to  appear  suddenly 
Mark  iv.     and   completely  before  the   eyes  of   men,  but  was  to 
Matt  xii"    a(^vance  Dy  a  process  of  gradual  unseen  growth.     The 
31-33.        former  of  the  two  parables   shows  that,  viewed  from 
18-21 Xm'  w^hout,  its  beginnings,  as  it  is  established  by  Jesus, 
seem  quite  small  in  contrast  to  the  great  extent  which 
it  shall  finally  attain ;  while  the  Parable  of  the  Leaven 
points  to  the  view  of  the  Kingdom  as  an  unseen  influence 
working  from  within,  gradually  spreading,  till  it  per- 
meates the  whole  life  of  the  man  or  the  Society. 
Saying  At  the  close  of  the  parables  Jesus  again  puts  to  His 

Instructed  disciples  the  question,  '  Have  ye  understood  all  these 
Scribe.  things?'  to  which  they  answer,  'Yea.'  He  then,  in  a 
51-53.  short  similitude,  shows  them  what  is  to  be  the  method 
of  the  rightly  instructed  teacher  in  His  Kingdom. 
Every  Scribe,  He  says,  who  has  become  a  disciple  of 
the  Kingdom  of  God  acts  on  the  principle  of  the  house- 
holder, who  in  producing  his  treasures  displays  his  new 
purchases  side  by  side  with  his  old  possessions.  So  the 
wise  Christian  teacher,  following  the  methods  of  his 
Master,  places  old  and  new  truths  side  by  side,  leading 
men  on  from  the  known  to  understand  the  unknown; 
just  as  Jesus  by  using  the  analogy  of  the  familiar  laws 
of  the  natural  world  gave  men  an  insight  into  those  of 
the  spiritual  order. 


CHAPTER    IX 

PERIOD   OF  POPULAR   RECEPTION 

Stilling  of  Storm. — Healing  of  Gerasene  Demoniac— Raising 
of  Jairus'  Daughter.  —  Woman  with  Issue  of  Blood. — 
Raising  of  Widow's  Son  at  Nain.— Rejection  at  Nazareth. 

Mark  iv.  35-41,  v,  vi.  1-6;  Matthew  viii.  18,  23-34, 
ix.  18-26,  xiii.  53-58;  Luke  viii.  22-56,  vii.  11-17, 
iv.  16-30. 

Evening   was   already  drawing   on   when   this  long  The 
day's  teaching  was  brought  to  a  close.     Jesus,  anxious  th*e  sj^f,.^ 
probably  to  avoid  the  importunity  of  the  crowds  who  Mark  iv. 
would  be  awaiting  Him  upon  the  shore,  bade  His  dis-  Matt.  viii. 
ciples  set  out  for  the  opposite  side  of  the  lake,  without  18,  23-27. 
even  putting  in  to  land.     St.  Mark  mentions  that  other  22-25 Vl  ' 
boats  accompanied  them  as  they  started.     During  the 
crossing  there  arose  one  of  those  violent  squalls  to  which 
a  land-locked  lake,  surrounded  by  mountains,  such  as 
the  Sea  of  Galilee,  is  always  exposed.     So  violent  were 
the  waves  that  they  began  to  beat  over  the  small  boat 
and   threatened   to  swamp  it.     Even  the  experienced 
fishermen,  accustomed  as  they  must  have  been  to  such 
storms,  were  terrified.     Filled  with  alarm,  they  came  to 
Jesus,  who,  tired  out  by  the  exertions  of  the  day,  lay 
calmly  sleeping  in  the  stern,  and  awoke  Him  with  the 
despairing  cry,  '  Master,  carest  Thou  not  that  we  perish  \ ' 


142    OUTLINES  OF  THE  SYNOPTIC  RECORD 

At  once  He  awoke  and  rebuked  the  raging  elements 
with  the  words,  'Peace,  be  still.'     Instantly  the  storm 
sank  as  suddenly  as  it  had  arisen,  and  a  complete  calm 
succeeded.     He  then  remonstrated  with  His  disciples  on 
their  cowardice  and  want  of  faith.     They  should  have 
trusted  in  His  care  and  protection  and  not  been  so  ready 
to  lose  heart.     The  disciples  were  awe-struck  at  this 
exhibition  of  the  power  of  their  Master  over  the  very 
forces  of  nature ;  such  an  act  showed  them  for  the  first 
time  that  Jesus  had  at  His  command  an  authority  even 
more   mysterious  than  that  displayed  in  the  cure  of 
diseases    and   the    expulsion    of    demons.     The    words 
passed  from  mouth  to  mouth,  'Who  then  is  this,  that 
even  the  wind  and  the  sea  obey  Him  ? '    The  question 
shows  how  imperfect  a  conception  the  disciples  still  had 
of  the  Person  of  Jesus.     Even  this  miracle  does  not  lead 
them  to  recognize  Him  as  the  Messiah,  much  less  to 
regard  Him  as  a  Divine  Being.     Probably  their  views 
on  the  subject  were  still  vague  and  indefinite. 
The  Heal-       Jesus  on  reaching  the  opposite  shore  landed  in  the 
Gerasene*  country  °f  the  Gerasenes  (Mark  and  Luke),  the  name 
Demoniac,  being  probably  derived  from  the  neighbouring  town  of 
1-20  V*      Gersa  or  Kersa,  the  site  of  which  lies  about  half-way 
Matt.  viii.  down  the   eastern  shore   of   the  lake  \     This  locality, 
Luke  viii    ^m§    within    the    territory   of    Herod    the    Tetrarch, 
26-39.        belonged  to  the  district  known  as  Decapolis,  being  so 
called  from  the  old  political  confederation  of  ten  cities. 
The  population  contained  a  large  admixture  of  Gentile 
elements,  and  so  here  there  would  be  a  greater  number 
of  those  Jews  who  had  adopted  Greek  habits  of  life, 
and  were   therefore    shunned   by   their   stricter  fellow 
countrymen. 

1  St.  Matthew  speaks  of  the  country  of  the  Gadarenes,  named 
apparently  from  Gadara,  the  principal  town  of  the  district. 


PERIOD  OF  POPULAR  RECEPTION       143 

Immediately  on  landing,  Jesus  was  met  by  a  man 
'with  an  unclean  spirit.'  This  man  was  a  maniac  of 
a  peculiarly  violent  and  dangerous  character;  quite 
naked  and  utterly  uncivilized,  he  dragged  out  a  lonely 
bestial  existence  among  the  rock-hewn  graves.  Such 
was  the  terror  he  inspired  that  none  dared  to  pass  that 
way.  Owing  to  his  great  strength  all  attempts  to  bind 
him  had  proved  fruitless ;  he  spent  his  days  '  crying  out, 
and  cutting  himself  with  stones.'  This  poor  demented 
creature  recognized  Jesus  from  a  distance,  and,  yielding 
to  the  same  consciousness  of  Divine  Power  which  His 
Presence  had  inspired  in  other  demoniacs,  ran  and  fell 
at  His  feet  with  the  loud  cry,  '  What  have  I  to  do  with 
Thee,  Jesus,  Thou  Son  of  the  Most  High  God  ?  I  adjure 
Thee  by  God,  torment  me  not.'  Jesus  first  put  to  him 
the  question,  '  What  is  thy  name  ? '  intending  doubtless 
to  awaken  in  him  the  slumbering  consciousness  of  his 
personal  identity.  His  reply,  '  My  name  is  Legion ;  for 
we  are  many,'  showed  that  he  was  still  unable  to 
separate  his  own  individuality  from  that  of  the  evil 
spirits  with  which  he  had  identified  himself.  Still 
speaking  in  the  name  of  the  band  of  evil  spirits,  he  kept 
beseeching  Jesus  that  He  would  not  send  them  out  of 
the  country  or  '  into  the  abyss,'  which  in  popular  belief 
was  the  home  of  such  powers  of  evil.  A  short  distance 
off,  on  the  mountain-side,  there  was  feeding  a  herd  of 
two  thousand  swine ;  the  evil  spirits  requested  that  on 
being  expelled  from  the  possessed  they  might  be  allowed 
to  enter  the  swine.  Jesus  granted  the  request,  and  the 
unclean  spirits  leaving  the  man  took  possession  of  the 
swine ;  immediately  the  whole  herd,  as  if  seized  by 
a  common  panic,  rushed  down  the  steep  incline  and 
perished  in  the  sea. 

The  incident  of  the  destruction  of  the  swine,  which 


144    OUTLINES  OF  THE  SYNOPTIC  RECORD 

formed  the  sequel  to  this  miracle,  has  aroused  a  good 
deal  of  question,  and  calls  for  somewhat  full  discussion. 

In  the  narrative  as  it  stands  we  are  met  by  two 
difficulties :  ( 1 )  The  moral  difficulty  involved  in  supposing 
that  Jesus  caused,  or  at  least  sanctioned,  what  seems  to 
be  a  wanton  destruction  of  property;  (2)  The  scientific 
difficulty,  that  the  narrative  implies  the  actual  personal 
existence  of  evil  powers,  who  could  be  transferred  from 
a  man  to  dumb  animals.  Thus,  in  this  case,  the  view 
that  demoniacal  possession  was  what  would  now  be 
regarded  as  a  form  of  lunacy  seems  to  be  excluded. 

1.  Assuming  the  narrative,  as  it  stands,  to  be  strictly 
accurate  in  every  detail,  various  explanations  have  been 
put  forward  to  remove  the  objections  raised  to  the  act 
of  Jesus  on  grounds  of  morality.  Thus  (a)  it  has  been 
supposed  that  it  was  penal  in  its  intention;  since  the 
Gerasene  owners  were  guilty  of  a  violation  of  the  law, 
which  strictly  forbade  the  Jews  to  keep  swine.  This 
explanation  can  hardly  be  regarded  as  satisfactory, 
since  (a)  it  is  very  doubtful  whether  the  owners  were 
Jews  at  all ;  (/3)  but  in  any  case  the  narrative  conveys 
not  the  least  hint  that  the  act  of  Jesus  had  any  such 
penal  intent. 

(b)  Another  explanation  suggested  is  that  Jesus, 
seeing  that  the  maniac  required  some  ocular  proof 
that  he  was  delivered  from  his  tormentors,  acceded  to 
his  request,  even  though  it  involved  the  destruction  of 
the  swine.  It  may  indeed  be  urged  that  this  explanation 
really  leaves  the  moral  difficulty  untouched,  since  it 
amounts  to  saying  that  Jesus  consented  to  do  evil  that 
good  might  come.  Yet  it  is  at  least  possible  that  the 
man  requested  some  such  visible  evidence  of  his  deliver- 
ance, and  that  this  is  the  meaning  of  the  request  attributed 
to  the  evil  spirits  to  be  allowed  to  enter  the  swine ;  in 


PERIOD  OF  POPULAR  RECEPTION       145 

that  case  we  can  hardly  doubt  that  Jesus  would  grant 
the  assurance  demanded,  since  He  would  account  one 
human  life  of  more  value  than  many  swine. 

2.  But  even  if  it  be  conceded  that  the  moral  difficulty 
is  not  an  insuperable  one,  the  question  still  presents 
itself,  can  the  belief  in  personal  evil  spirits,  having  an 
existence  independent  of  those  possessed,  be  reconciled 
with  modern  scientific  ideas  ? 

Now  there  can  be  no  doubt  that  the  Evangelists 
intended  to  describe  a  case  of  actual  possession  by  evil 
spirits.  Yet  this  seems  one  of  those  instances  where  it 
is  important  to  distinguish  what  really  occurred  from 
the  conclusions,  possibly  erroneous,  drawn  by  the  eye- 
witnesses. All  that  could  be  actually  seen  was  the  cure 
of  the  possessed,  followed  by  the  wild  rush  of  the  swine. 
If  we  take  the  view  that  possession  was  a  violent  form 
of  lunacy,  it  is  probable  that  the  healing  of  the  maniac 
was  accompanied,  as  in  other  cases,  by  paroxysms  and 
cries  on  his  part.  These  may  have  frightened  the  swine 
feeding  near  by,  so  that,  seized  by  a  common  panic,  they 
rushed  headlong  over  the  precipice.  The  eyewitnesses 
concluded  that  Jesus  was  the  author  of  this  destruction, 
though  He  did  not  really  contemplate  it.  They  were 
thus  led  to  attribute  the  fate  of  the  swine  to  a  direct 
permission  given  by  Him  to  the  evil  spirits,  and  this 
mistaken  view  is  reproduced  in  the  narrative  of  the 
Evangelists.  This  explanation,  if  it  be  accepted,  seems 
to  remove  the  objections  raised  to  the  narrative  on 
scientific  grounds,  and  at  the  same  time  to  account  for, 
what  must  otherwise  appear  to  be,  an  act  of  destruction 
on  the  part  of  Jesus  hitherto  unparalleled. 

St.  Matthew  mentions  that  there  were  two  demoniacs, 
but  his  statement  is  unsupported  by  the  other  accounts. 
Possibly  in  this  miracle  the  variation  was  due  to  a  con- 

L 


146    OUTLINES  OF  THE  SYNOPTIC  RECORD 

fusion  on  the  part  of  the  Evangelists,  caused  by  the  use 
of  the  plural  '  we '  in  the  words  of  the  demoniac.  This, 
however,  will  not  account  for  several  other  cases  where 
the  same  Evangelist  mentions  the  number  of  those 
cured  as  two,  where  the  others  speak  of  only  one. 

The  keepers  of  the  swine  fled  into  the  city  with  their 
startling  news.  Thereupon  the  whole  population  came 
out  to  the  scene  of  the  miracle,  where  they  found  the 
man  sitting  at  the  feet  of  his  Deliverer,  clothed  and  in 
complete  possession  of  all  his  faculties.  Yet  so  far  was 
the  act  from  arousing  any  feelings  of  gratitude  that  the 
Gerasenes,  either  overawed  at  the  exhibition  of  super- 
natural power,  or  merely  dreading  further  damage  to 
their  property,  besought  Jesus  to  depart  from  their 
borders.  Following  His  invariable  principle  of  never 
forcing  Himself  on  those  who  were  reluctant  to  receive 
Him,  He  at  once  acceded  to  their  request.  The  man 
who  had  been  cured  besought  that  he  might  be  allowed 
to  accompany  Him ;  Jesus,  however,  bade  him  remain 
behind  and  proclaim  among  his  fellow  countrymen  the 
tidings  of  the  great  mercy  which  God  had  shown  him. 
This  command  is  directly  contrary  to  the  injunction  of 
strict  secrecy  usually  enforced  in  such  cases,  but  since 
Jesus  was  leaving  the  locality,  He  had  not  the  same 
reasons  as  elsewhere  for  avoiding  an  outbreak  of  popular 
enthusiasm ;  while  the  testimony  of  the  man  would  give 
to  the  population  of  Decapolis  a  further  opportunity  of 
accepting  Jesus. 
Raising  As  soon  as  they  reached  the  opposite  shore  the  crowd 

of  Janus'  began  to  throng  Him  as  closely  and  eagerly  as  ever; 
Mark  v.61  and  His  time  was  again  fully  occupied  with  preaching 
21-24,35-  an(j  healing  by  the  lake-side.  Now  we  hear  of  a  new 
Matt.  ix.  applicant  for  His  help.  Jai'rus,  one  of  the  rulers  of  the 
18,  19,  23-  synagogue,  whose  little   daughter   of  twelve  years  old 


PERIOD  OF  POPULAR  RECEPTION       147 

was  lying  even  then  at  death's  door,  came,  and  falling  Luke  viii. 
at  His  feet  besought  Him  to  come  and  lay  His  hands  ^      '  49~ 
upon  her  that  she  might  recover.     Jesus  at  once  set 
out  in  obedience  to  the  summons  for  the  ruler's  house ; 
but,   on   the  way,   there  occurred   an   incident  which 
delayed  His  arrival. 

Among  the  crowd  was  a  woman  who  for  twelve  years  Healing 
had  been  suffering   from   chronic   haemorrhage.     The  ^oman 
hopeless  nature  of  her  malady  is  strikingly  brought  out  with  an 
by  the  statement  in  St.  Mark  that  she  '  had  suffered  %i™dof 
many  things  of  many  physicians,  and  had  spent  all  that  Mark  v. 
she  had,  and  was  nothing  bettered,  but  rather  grew  Matt  \x 
worse.'     She  had  heard  of  the  fame  of  Jesus,  but  was  20-22. 
restrained,  no   doubt,  from  openly  appealing  to   Him,  4^.43 vm' 
not  only  by  the  shrinking  from  public  exposure  natural 
to  one  suffering  from  such  an  ailment,  but  also  by  the 
fact  that  her  condition  rendered  her  Levitically  unclean. 
She   felt  convinced  that  if  she  could  but   touch   the 
person  of  Jesus  she  would  be  cured.    Pressing  in  through 
the  crowd  she  contrived  to  touch  one  of  the  tassels 
attached  to  the  tallith,  or   outer  garment,  which  He 
wore.   No  sooner  had  she  done  so  than  the  haemorrhage 
was  checked,  and  she  at  once  felt  that  'her  scourge' 
was  removed.     Despite  the  thronging  of  the  multitude 
the  woman's  touch  did  not  escape  Jesus'  notice.     Fully 
conscious  in  Himself  that  the  power  of  healing  inherent 
in  Him  had  been  exercised,  He  turned  about  and  asked, 
'  Who  touched  my  garments  ? '     Though  Peter  and  the 
other  disciples  protested  that  amid  the  pressure  of  the 
multitude  it  was  impossible  to  distinguish  a  particular 
touch,  Jesus  looked  round  and  singled  out  the  woman, 
who  had  probably  been  unable,  owing  to  the  throng, 
to  hide  herself  in  the  crowd.     Realizing  that  conceal- 
ment was  impossible,  she  came  and  fell  down  before 

L2 


148     OUTLINES  OF  THE  SYNOPTIC  RECORD 

Him  and  made  a  full  confession.  Jesus  would  not 
allow  her  to  depart  without  correcting  her,  as  yet, 
imperfect  and  superstitious  faith.  He  first  told  her 
that  it  was  not  the  mere  touch  of  His  garments,  but 
the  personal  trust  in  His  power  which  such  a  touch 
implied,  to  which  she  owed  her  recovery :  '  Thy  faith 
hath  saved  thee ' ;  He  then  bade  her  depart  in  peace 
assured  of  her  complete  cure. 

While  this  incident  was  taking  place  tidings  were 
brought  to  Jairus  that  his  child  was  dead,  so  that  there 
was  no  further  occasion  to  trouble  the  Teacher.  Jesus, 
overhearing1  the  announcement,  reassured  the  father  with 
the  words,  'Fear  not,  only  believe.'  He  allowed  none 
to  accompany  Him  to  the  house  of  the  ruler  except 
Peter,  James,  and  John,  wishing  probably  to  avoid  at 
such  a  time  any  intrusion  on  the  privacy  of  domestic 
grief. 

This  is  the  first  occasion  on  which  we  hear  of  these 
three  disciples  being  singled  out  from  the  rest  of  the 
Twelve  ;  but  it  would  seem  that  just  as  the  Twelve  had 
been  selected  from  a  larger  number  of  disciples,  so  from 
now  these  three  began  to  form  an  inner  circle,  which 
was  admitted  to  a  special  share  of  intimacy  with  Jesus. 

They  found  the  house  filled  already  with  the  din  of 
wailing  relatives  and  friends,  as  well  as  of  the  hired 
mourners  and  flute-players,  which  formed  the  usual 
accompaniment  of  an  Eastern  mourning.  Jesus,  to 
whom  all  this  'pageantry  of  woe'  was  evidently  dis- 
tasteful, rebuked  the  tumultuous  mourners,  telling  them 
that  the  child  was  not  really  dead,  but  only  sleeping — 
a  statement  which  was  met  with  derisive  laughter. 
Having  expelled  the  crowd,  He  took  with  Him  into 
the  chamber  of  death  only  the  parents  and  the  three 
1  Oi*  '  not  heeding,'  R.V.  text  (-napaKovoas). 


PERIOD  OF  POPULAR  RECEPTION       149 

disciples.  On  His  entry  He  took  the  child  by  the  hand 
with  the  words  '  Talitha  cumi,'  interpreted  by  St.  Mark 
as,  '  Damsel,  I  say  unto  thee,  Arise.'  Immediately,  to 
the  intense  astonishment  of  those  present,  the  girl  arose 
and  walked.  Jesus  impressed  on  the  witnesses  of  the 
miracle  a  strict  injunction  of  silence — a  command  which 
had,  probably,  more  effect  in  this  than  in  most  cases, 
since  it  would  fall  in  with  the  natural  desire  of  the 
parents  to  avoid  notoriety  or  idle  curiosity.  Probably 
the  actual  facts  were  not  generally  known,  since  no 
reference  is  made  to  the  effect  produced  on  any  except 
the  eyewitnesses.  No  doubt  the  idea  which  got  abroad 
was  that  the  result  had  proved  that  Jesus  was  right, 
and  that  the  child  was  really  only  in  a  swoon.  In  this 
way  He  escaped  the  embarrassment  which  the  excite- 
ment aroused  by  the  miracle  would  otherwise  have 
produced.  His  further  command  to  give  the  child  food 
was,  no  doubt,  intended  to  show  the  parents  that  she 
was  fully  restored  to  normal  existence,  and  that  life 
must  now  be  supported  by  those  ordinary  means,  which 
in  the  excitement  of  the  moment  were  liable  to  be 
forgotten. 

We  can  see  how  the  preceding  miracles  must  have  The  Effect 
afforded  to  the  disciples  a  gradually  deepening  insight  ™.thefe 
into  the  power  of  Jesus.     The  calming  of  the  storm  on  the 
proved  that  even  the  forces  of  nature  were  subject  to  r)lsclPles- 
His  authority  ;  the  cases  of  the  maniac  and  the  woman 
with  the  issue  of  blood  showed  them  that  no  form  of 
physical  disease  was  so  violent  or  so  deep-seated  as  to 
be  beyond  His  power  to  heal ;  while,  finally,  the  raising 
of   the  ruler's  child  revealed  to   the   three,  who  were 
admitted   to   see   the   miracle,  that   their  Master  was 
supreme  even  over  death  itself. 

Though  no  other  instance  of  Jesus  raising  the  dead 


150    OUTLINES  OF  THE  SYNOPTIC  RECORD 

was  recorded  in  the  Marcan  tradition,  St.  Luke  relates 
another  miracle  of  the  kind.  Jesus  was  on  one  occa- 
sion entering  Nain,  a  small  town  to  the  south-east 
of  Nazareth,  accompanied  by  a  large  concourse  of 
people.  As  they  reached  the  gates  of  the  city,  they 
were  met  by  a  funeral  cortege  bearing  out  to  burial 
a  young  man  of  the  town.  The  circumstances  of 
the  case  gained  an  added  pathos  from  the  fact  that 
he  was  an  only  son,  and  his  mother  was  herself 
a  widow.  Moved  with  compassion,  Jesus  bade  her 
'weep  not.'  He  first  touched  the  bier,  which  would 
be  made  probably  of  wickerwork,  as  a  sign  to  the 
bearers  to  halt.  He  then  addressed  the  dead  man  with 
the  words, '  Young  man,  I  say  unto  thee,  Arise.'  On  an 
instant  the  dead  man  sat  up  and  began  to  speak,  and 
he  was  restored  by  Jesus  to  his  mother  alive  and  well. 

We  notice  that  here,  as  in  the  case  of  the  ruler's 
daughter,  the  recovery  is  marked  by  no  gradual  stages, 
but  life  is  at  once  completely  restored  by  the  mere  word 
of  Jesus,  without  involving  any  apparent  physical  or 
mental  strain  on  His  part.  This  distinguishes  these 
raisings  from  the  dead  from  similar  miracles  in  the  Old 
Testament  recorded  of  Elijah  and  Elisha. 

The  miracle  created  a  deep  impression;  the  word 
went  forth  that  God  had  indeed  visited  His  people  once 
more  by  the  sending  of  this  mighty  prophet.  It  is  said 
that  the  news  spread  over  '  the  whole  of  Judaea  and  the 
region  round  about,'  where  we  must  probably  under- 
stand 'Judaea'  to  stand  for  all  Palestine,  including 
Galilee,  in  accordance  with  the  wider  sense  in  which  the 
term  is  used  by  St.  Luke.  We  cannot  be  certain  at 
what  point  in  the  Galilean  ministry  this  miracle  should 
be7placed.  In  St.  Luke's  narrative  it  stands  between 
the  healing  of  the  centurion's  servant  and  the  message 


PERIOD  OF  POPULAR  RECEPTION       151 

of  the  Baptist.  The  best  supported  reading,  'It  came 
to  pass  soon  afterwards  (iv  ro>  e^s),'  leaves  the  connexion 
of  the  incident  with  what  precedes  quite  vague.  Prob- 
ably St.  Luke,  finding  the  narrative  in  one  of  his 
sources  with  no  clear  indication  of  time,  placed  it  in 
this  position  from  a  desire  to  supply  an  instance  of 
raising  the  dead,  to  which  the  words  of  Jesus'  message 
to  the  Baptist  (vexpol  iyecpovrat)  might  refer.  We  notice 
that  in  the  case  of  this  raising  Jesus  makes  no  attempt 
to  keep  it  a  secret;  the  act  is  done  publicly,  in  the 
presence  of  the  crowds  both  of  His  own  disciples  and 
of  the  mourners,  who  were  following  the  funeral.  It 
may  have  been  that  the  circumstances  of  the  case 
rendered  any  attempt  at  secrecy  impossible ;  yet  if,  as 
has  been  sometimes  suggested,  the  miracle  took  place 
just  when  Jesus  was  on  the  point  of  taking  His  final 
departure  from  Galilee,  there  would  not  be  the  same 
object  in  avoiding  publicity.  It  is  perhaps  best  for  this 
reason  to  place  the  miracle  at  the  close  of  the  Galilean 
ministry. 

These  acts  of  raising  the  dead  offer  a  peculiar  diffi-  Conside- 

culty  to  the  minds  of  modern  readers.     At  the  same  J"atl£ns  a8 
J  to  these 

time  we  must  remember  that  the  contemporaries  of  Miracles. 
Jesus  did  not  draw  the  same  distinction  between  the 
restoration  of  the  dead  and  other  miracles  as  seems 
natural  to  us.  This  is  shown  by  the  comments  which 
passed  from  mouth  to  mouth  on  the  healing  of  the 
widow's  son.  Men  saw  in  it  indeed  a  proof  that  Jesus 
was  a  successor  of  the  prophets  of  old,  but  not  that  He 
wielded  powers  which  were  in  themselves  superhuman. 

When  we  turn  to  a  general  consideration  of  these 
miracles,  we  notice  that  the  raising  of  the  young  man 
of  Nain  is  recorded  only  by  St.  Luke,  and  the  narrative 
has  on  that  ground  sometimes  been  regarded  as  open 


152    OUTLINES  OF  THE  SYNOPTIC  RECORD 

to  suspicion.  Yet  no  reader  can  fail  to  be  impressed 
by  the  vivid  and  life-like  character  of  the  account.  To 
suppose  this  to  be  due  to  the  descriptive  powers  of  the 
Evangelist  or  his  source  is  utterly  incompatible  with 
either  the  literary  capacity  of  the  age  or  the  conditions 
under  which  our  Gospel  narratives  were  produced.  It 
has  been  suggested  that  both  the  Synoptic  miracles  were 
really  cases  not  of  death,  but  of  trance  or  suspended 
animation.  On  this  view,  Jesus  alone,  either  by  more 
accurate  diagnosis  or  by  a  superhuman  knowledge,  in 
either  instance  recognized  that  the  death,  of  which  all 
others  were  assured,  was,  in  fact,  only  apparent.  Yet 
the  balance  of  probability  against  the  supposition  that 
one  who  was  regarded  as  dead  should  be  in  a  state  of 
trance  is  in  any  particular  case  very  great ;  but  when 
we  have  two  such  instances,  it  becomes  almost  incal- 
culable. On  the  whole,  we  must  conclude  that  any 
rationalistic  explanation  seems  exposed  to  far  greater 
difficulties  than  the  simple,  straightforward  narrative  of 
the  Evangelists. 
Eejec-  These  miracles  could  not  fail  to  make  the  fame  of 

N°n  atfVi    ^esus   s^n   more   widely   known.     Throughout   Galilee 
Mark  vi. '   the  popular  enthusiasm  in  His  favour  ran  higher  than 

}:6,       ..    ever  before,  and  the  inclination  to  espouse  His   cause 
Matt.  xin.  '  ,.  i 

53-58.        became  still  more  marked.     One   exception   only  was 

j^k®  1V-  there  to  the  general  welcome  accorded  Him  ;  at  Nazareth 
His  fellow-townsmen  refused  a  hearing  to  His  message, 
and  expelled  Him  from  their  borders.  Possibly,  the 
preference  given  by  Jesus  to  the  neighbouring  Caper- 
naum over  His  own  town  may  have  made  the  Nazarenes 
less  inclined  to  receive  Him.  At  any  rate,  they  would 
not  accept  the  claim  to  a  unique  Divine  mission  put 
forward  by  One,  the  circumstances  of  whose  early  life, 
education,  and  family  were  well  known  to  them.     Their 


PERIOD  OF  POPULAR  RECEPTION       153 

want  of  receptivity  rendered  any  healing  ministry  among 
them  impossible  for  Jesus,  so  that,  we  are  told,  '  He 
could  there  do  no  mighty  work,  save  that  He  laid  His  Mark  vi. 
hands  upon  a  few  sick  folk,  and  healed  them.  And  '  ' 
He  marvelled  because  of  their  unbelief.'  We  have  in 
this  statement  a  proof  of  what  also  appears  from  other 
instances,  that  the  healing  power  of  Jesus  was  in  some 
way  dependent  on  the  spiritual  condition  of  the  recipi- 
ents. The  account  of  His  preaching  on  this  occasion 
is  most  fully  related  by  St.  Luke.  Entering  into  the 
synagogue  on  the  Sabbath,  He  was  invited  to  read  the 
lesson  and  give  the  address  on  the  passage  read — an 
office  which  any  qualified  teacher  present  might  be 
asked  to  perform.  He  chose  for  a  text  on  which  to 
found  His  discourse  the  passage  in  which  the  prophet  Isa.  lxi.  1. 
of  the  Exile  declares  himself  anointed  to  proclaim  to 
the  captives  in  Babylon  the  good  news  of  deliverance 
and  restoration,  and  the  approach  of  a  time  of  gladness, 
such  as  that  of  the  year  of  Jubilee,  '  the  acceptable  year 
of  the  Lord.'  This  passage  He  declared  to  be  now  ful- 
filled in  Himself.  St.  LukeV  summary  leaves  us  to 
conjecture  the  exact  line  of  exposition  which  He  adopted 
in  setting  forth  His  claims.  But  we  read  that  the  effect 
produced  on  His  fellow  townsmen  was  one  of  mingled 
admiration  and  incredulity.  Jesus,  however,  saw  clearly 
the  treatment  which  He  must  expect  from  those  thus 
prejudiced  against  His  message.  They  would  doubtless, 
He  told  them,  address  to  Him  the  proverb,  '  Physician, 
heal  Thyself  ' ;  bidding  Him  repeat  in  His  own  country 
the  wonders  reported  of  Him  from  Capernaum,  for 
indeed,  He  declared,  'No  prophet  is  acceptable  in  his 
own  country.'  He  then  proceeded  to  justify  His  action 
in  having  preferred  Capernaum  to  His  own  town,  by 
citing  the  cases  of  Elijah  and  Elisha,  to  show  that  the 


154    OUTLINES  OF  THE  SYNOPTIC  RECORD 

prophets  of  the  Old  Covenant  had  performed  their 
miracles  for  those  outside  the  borders  of  their  own 
country.  The  references,  doubtless,  were  intended  also 
to  hint  that  a  yet  wider  scope  was  destined  for  His 
ministry  in  the  future.  This  line  of  argument  stung 
His  hearers,  already  unfavourably  disposed  towards 
Him,  to  fury  :  dragging  Him  out  of  their  city,  they  tried 
to  cast  Him  down  from  the  brow  of  the  hill.  Jesus, 
however,  '  passing  through  the  midst  of  them  went  His 
way.'  St.  Luke's  narrative  leaves  it  open  whether  this 
escape  is  to  be  regarded  as  miraculous,  or  whether  His 
assailants,  overawed,  as  on  other  occasions,  by  the  calm 
majesty  and  dignity  of  His  demeanour,  were  thereby 
rendered  powerless  to  execute  their  murderous  purpose. 
St.  Luke  places  the  visit  to  Nazareth  at  the  opening 
of  the  Galilean  ministry.  A  comparison,  however,  of 
the  two  accounts  leaves  little  doubt  that  he  refers  to 
the  same  visit  as  that  which  occurs  at  this  point  in  the 
Marcan  outline,  though  it  would  seem  that  St.  Luke  is 
drawing  from  an  independent  source.  In  either  case 
mention  is  made  of  the  surprise  which  the  preaching  of 
Jesus  produced  on  His  fellow  countrymen.  This  would 
be  unaccountable  if  His  claims  had  been  already  pre- 
sented to  them  in  a  similar  way  on  a  previous  occasion. 
The  visit,  too,  is  clearly  out  of  place  in  its  present 
position  in  St.  Luke's  Gospel,  since  the  reference  to 
miracles  at  Capernaum  implies  a  considerable  period  of 
previous  activity.  But  the  contents,  as  far  as  we  have 
them,  of  the  sermon  itself  prove  still  more  conclusively 
that  this  visit  cannot  be  placed  at  the  very  opening  of 
the  Galilean  ministry.  It  may  indeed  be  doubted  in 
what  sense  the  claim  that  the  prophecy  of  Isaiah  was 
fulfilled  in  Him  would  be  understood  by  His  hearers; 
but  even  such  a  veiled  Messianic  revelation  as  it  implies 


PERIOD  OF  POPULAR  RECEPTION       155 

would  be  improbable  at  the  very  outset  of  the  ministry. 
We  notice,  too,  that  St.  Luke  passes  over  the  visit 
where  it  occurs  in  the  Marcan  outline,  which  looks  as  if 
he  considered  it  identical  with  that  which  he  had  already 
recorded.  Possibly  he  placed  this  visit  at  the  outset  of 
the  ministry,  as  affording  a  foreshadowing  of  the  final 
rejection  which  Jesus  would  meet.  So,  too,  the  address 
in  the  synagogue  at  Nazareth,  standing  thus  in  the  very 
forefront  of  the  ministry,  would  serve  as  a  sort  of  mani- 
festo, revealing  the  conception  which  Jesus  entertained 
of  His  Messianic  mission  :  and  so  in  this  position  it 
would  in  this  Gospel  answer  the  same  purpose  as  that 
assigned  by  the  first  Evangelist  to  the  Sermon  on  the 
Mount.  At  the  same  time,  we  must  not  exclude  the 
possibility  that  Jesus  did  also  visit  His  native  town 
quite  early  in  the  Galilean  ministry,  and  that  to  that 
extent  St.  Luke's  account  has  an  historical  basis.  In  that 
case,  he  has  referred  to  this  visit,  of  which  probably  no 
details  had  survived,  incidents  which  really  took  place 
at  the  visit  later  in  the  ministry. 

If  we  place  the  visit  at  the  point  where  it  occurs  in 
the  Marcan  outline,  we  are  led  to  modify  the  conception 
which  we  might  otherwise  have  formed  that  the  syna- 
gogues had  by  this  time  been  completely  closed  to  Jesus 
by  the  prejudice  of  the  religious  authorities. 

We  have  now  very  nearly  reached  the  climax  of  the 
public  ministry  of  Jesus.  In  the  next  chapter  we  shall 
see  His  popularity  with  the  Galilean  crowd  reach  its 
highest  point  with  the  miracle  of  feeding,  and  shall  be 
able  to  trace  the  beginnings  of  its  decline. 


CHAPTER  X 

THE  CRISIS   OF  THE   GALILEAN  MINISTRY 

Circuit  in  Galilee.— Mission  of  the  Twelve.— Mission  of  the 
Seventy. — Teaching  to  Disciples. — The  Three  Aspirants. — 
Jesus  and  Herod. — Woes. — Return  of  Disciples  and  Hymn 
of  Praise.— Feeding  of  Five  Thousand. — Walking  on  Sea. — 
Miracles. — Dispute  on  Tradition. 

Mark  vi.  7-16,  30-56,  vii.  1-23 ;  Matthew  viii.  19-22, 
ix.  35-38,  x,  xi.  20-30,  xiv.  1,  2,  13-36,  xv.  1-20; 
Luke  ix.1-17,  57-62,  x.  1-24,  xii.  2-9, 11,  12,  51-53, 
xiii.  31-33;  John  vi.  1-21. 

The  Crisis  The  turning-point  of  the  Galilean  ministry  was  now 
™—e,  at  hand ;  it  is  probable  that  Jesus  Himself  had  already 
in  Galilee,  realized  what  its  issue  must  be.  His  breach  with  the 
Pharisees  and  religious  leaders  was  growing  every  day 
deeper  and  more  irreparable.  As  yet,  it  is  true,  the 
mass  of  the  people  seemed  to  be  inclined  to  espouse  His 
cause  ;  indeed  the  outward  enthusiasm,  aroused  among 
the  populace  of  Galilee  by  His  teaching  and  miracles, 
was  rapidly  growing  in  intensity.  But  yet  He  must 
have  seen  that  such  support  rested  on  a  radical  mis- 
conception of  His  Person  and  His  views ;  the  character 
of  the  popular  Messianic  expectation  remained  un- 
changed. Everywhere  He  found  evidence  that  the 
people  had  completely  failed  to  enter  into  His  more 
spiritual  ideas  as  to  the  nature  of  the  Kingdom  of  God ; 


CRISIS  OF  THE  GALILEAN  MINISTRY     157 

while  He  and  His  hearers  used  the  same  terms,  they 
attached  to  them  an  entirely  different  meaning.  The 
people  still  looked  for  Him  to  come  forward  as  an  earthly 
king  in  such  a  way  as  to  gratify  their  materialistic  hopes. 
Under  such  circumstances  the  final  rupture  could  not  be 
long  delayed ;  when  once  the  populace  realized  that  He 
would  never  consent  to  fulfil  their  Messianic  ideals,  their 
support  would  be  gone,  even  if  they  did  not  actually 
turn  against  Him. 

Knowing  that  the  days  of  His  public  ministry  were  Circuit  in 
numbered,  Jesus  doubtless  wished  meanwhile  to  provide  jJari^vi 
that  an  opportunity  should,  as  far  as  possible,  be  given  6 b. 
to  all  the  Galileans  to  receive  His  message.     With  this  35at  '  1X' 
end  He  Himself  once  more  entered  upon  an  extended  Luke  xiii. 
tour  of  preaching  throughout  Galilee ;  but  it  was  impos-    w* 
sible  in  the  brief  time  that  remained  for  Jesus  Himself 
to  traverse  the  whole  district.     He  therefore  took  a  fur-  Mission 
ther  step  towards  giving  a  wider  range  to  His  proclama-  Twelve. 
tion  by  calling  to  Him  the  Twelve  and  sending  them  out  Mark  V1- 
to  act  as  His  messengers.     His  object  in  so  doing  He  Matt.  ix. 
explained  to  them  in  the  words :  'The  harvest  is  plenteous,  ^6-x-  }m 
but  the  labourers  are  few.     Pray  ye  therefore  the  Lord 
of  the  harvest,  that  He  send  forth  labourers  into  His 
harvest.'     This  saying  was  doubtless  a  proverbial  one, 
meaning  that  now,  when  the  time  was  come  for  reaping  the 
harvest  which  His  preaching  had  sown,  fresh  labourers  had 
to  be  called  in  for  the  task.    Thus  the  temporary  mission 
of  the  Twelve  served  to  carry  the  Messianic  call  of  Jesus 
far  more  widely  throughout  Galilee ;    at  the  same  time 
our  Lord  doubtless  wished  thereby,  in  view  of  their 
future  work,  to  train  them  to  act  independently  of  Him. 
For  this  purpose  He  invested  them  with  power  to  expel 
the  demons,  and  to  heal  the  sick.     These  miraculous 
powers  would  serve  as  their  credentials ;   as  in  the  case 


158     OUTLINES  OF  THE  SYNOPTIC  RECORD 


Instruc- 
tions 
to  the 
Twelve. 
Mark  vi. 
8-11. 
Matt.  x. 
5-15, 
40-42. 
Luke  ix. 
1-5. 


of  the  healing  activity  of  Jesus,  they  would  have  the 
effect  of  attracting  attention  to  their  preaching,  and 
would  afford  a  proof  to  the  beholders  that  the  grace  of 
God  was  indeed  at  work  among  them. 

In  His  address  to  the  Twelve  on  sending  them  forth, 
Jesus  laid  down  the  scope  and  objects  of  their  mission, 
and  the  lines  on  which  they  were  to  proceed.  They 
were  not  to  instruct  men,  as  Jesus  did,  as  to  the  nature 
and  meaning  of  the  Kingdom  of  God — their  own  con- 
ceptions were  as  yet  too  crude  for  such  a  task — but 
merely  to  act  as  heralds  (/o/pvo-o-eiv),  proclaiming  its 
approach.  As  regards  the  extent  of  their  ministry,  they 
were  not  to  go  '  into  any  way  of  the  Gentiles '  or  even 
■  to  any  city  of  the  Samaritans,'  but  to  confine  their 
preaching  to  the  'lost  sheep  of  the  house  of  Israel.' 
They  would  therefore  select  those  cities  where  the  popu- 
lation was  predominantly  Jewish ;  in  so  doing  they 
would  only  be  observing  the  limitations  which  Jesus 
imposed  on  His  own  teaching.  For  personal  equipment 
they  were  to  take  only  the  barest  necessaries ;  for  all 
further  supplies  they  were  to  be  dependent  on  the 
hospitality  which  they  should  receive.  The  command 
to  set  out  thus  lightly  clothed  and  shod  impressed  upon 
them  the  urgency  of  their  mission,  and  reminded  them 
that  it  had  but  a  temporary  character. 

Jesus  further  gave  them  full  instructions  as  to  the 
methods  which  they  were  to  adopt  in  their  proclama- 
tion of  the  good  news.  They  were  not  to  attempt  to 
make  known  their  message  by  public  preaching,  either 
in  the  synagogues  or  in  the  open  air,  as  Jesus  Himself 
was  accustomed  to  do;  they  were  to  deal  rather  with 
individuals.  At  each  city  which  they  entered,  they 
were,  after  inquiring  who  in  it  was  worthy,  to  select  one 
house,  and  throw  themselves  on  the  hospitality  of  the 


CRISIS  OF  THE  GALILEAN  MINISTRY     159 

inmates ;  if  they  were  well  received,  they  were  to  remain 
there  during  their  stay  in  the  city,  and  not  to  move  from 
house  to  house  ;  thus  they  were  to  proclaim  their  message 
in  family  circles,  starting  in  those  likely  to  be  ready  to 
receive  it.  On  their  journey  they  were  to  greet  none  by 
the  way ;  this  prohibition  being  intended  to  remind  them 
that  they  were  on  God's  work;  hence  so  sacred  was  their 
mission,  and  so  urgent  in  its  character,  that  it  would 
brook  no  delay  even  for  the  interchange  of  ordinary 
courtesies.  Each  house  that  they  entered  they  were  to 
greet  with  the  blessing  of  peace.  In  the  case  of  any 
house  or  city  which  refused  to  receive  them,  they  were 
on  leaving  it  to  shake  off  the  dust  from  their  feet  as 
a  testimony  of  the  guilt  which  it  had  thereby  incurred ; 
upon  such  a  city  the  judgement  should  be  heavier  than 
that  upon  Sodom  and  Gomorrha.  Such  was  the  sanctity 
of  their  commission,  that  he  that  received  them  was 
indeed  receiving  Jesus  Himself,  and  in  receiving  Him 
was  receiving  the  Father  who  sent  Him.  For,  Jesus 
declared,  '  He  that  receiveth  a  prophet  in  the  name  of 
a  prophet,'  i.e.  out  of  respect  to  his  position  as  a  prophet, 
or  'receiveth  a  righteous  man  in  the  name  of  a  righteous 
man,'  i.e.  because  he  is  a  righteous  man,  should  himself 
receive  an  equivalent  reward. 

The  Twelve  then  set  out  on  their  mission,  and  Jesus 
was  left  to  carry  on  His  own  ministry  unattended. 
Hence  we  naturally  hear  no  details  of  this  final  circuit 
throughout  the  villages  of  Galilee.  Thus,  by  this  multi- 
plication of  the  agents,  the  proclamation  of  Jesus — '  the 
kingdom  of  heaven  has  come ' — must  have  been  carried 
over  almost  the  whole  of  Galilee. 

In  addition  to  this  mission  of  the  Twelve,  St.  Luke  Mission 

records  another  sending  out  of  disciples,  which  he  places  Seventy.  (?) 

near  the  beginning   of  his    '  great   insertion.'     In  this  ^uke  x- 

1-12. 


160    OUTLINES  OF  THE  SYNOPTIC  RECORD 

instance  Jesus  appointed  (<iv£8ei£ev)  seventy,  and  sent 
them  forward  to  prepare  for  Him  in  every  village  and 
place  which  He  intended  to  enter  on  His  journey 
towards  Jerusalem.  The  Evangelist  records  an  address 
containing  instructions  to  these  disciples,  very  similar 
to  those  already  given  to  the  Twelve.  It  is  somewhat 
difficult  to  account  for  this  second  mission,  and  the 
view  not  unnaturally  suggests  itself  that  we  have  here 
only  a  duplicate  of  the  former  account;  since  (a)  we 
have  no  other  traces  in  the  Gospels  that  so  large  a  body 
of  the  followers  of  Jesus  had  reached  a  sufficiently 
advanced  stage  of  discipleship  to  be  fit  to  undertake 
an  independent  mission  of  this  character  :  (b)  in  the 
Gentile  tradition  the  number  seventy,  regarded  as  typical 
of  the  nations  of  the  earth,  might  not  unnaturally  be 
substituted  for  the  number  twelve,  standing  for  the 
tribes  of  Israel.  On  the  other  hand,  it  is  to  be  noticed 
that  in  other  instances  St.  Luke  seems  to  avoid  the 
repetition  of  similar  narratives,  probably  because  he 
considered  himself  able  to  identify  them  as  variant 
accounts  of  the  same  incident,  as  in  the  case  of  the  two 
miracles  of  feeding  ;  thus  it  would  seem  that  the  Evan- 
gelist himself,  at  any  rate,  thought  that  two  distinct 
missions  actually  took  place.  In  that  case,  it  is  quite 
possible  that  St.  Luke  has  referred  to  the  sending  out 
of  the  Seventy  instructions  actually  given  to  the  Twelve. 
We  may  then  suppose  that  the  mission  was  of  a  less 
official  and  formal  character  than  the  preceding  had 
been  ;  the  work  of  those  sent  out  was  not  to  preach,  but 
merely  to  carry  before  the  news  of  Jesus'  own  approach. 
It  was  the  usual  practice  of  Jesus  to  put  men's  characters 
to  the  test  and  to  draw  out  their  capacities,  by  setting 
them  some  work  to  do  for  Him. 

The  The  literary  connexion  of  the  different  versions   of 

literary 


CRISIS  OF  THE  GALILEAN  MINISTRY     161 

the  instructions  given  to  the  Twelve  and  to  the  Seventy  Connex- 
is  involved  in   considerable   obscurity.     The  following  j.h^s° 
seems  at  least  a  possible  explanation  of  the  origin  of  Accounts. 
the  two  accounts. 

There  existed  two  independent  traditions  of  a  discourse 
spoken  by  Jesus  at  a  sending  forth  of  disciples  ;  one  of 
these  was  preserved  in  the  brief  account  of  St.  Mark 
of  the  mission  of  the  Twelve.  But,  besides  this,  the 
second  source  contained  a  fuller  and  more  detailed 
address,  the  contents  of  which  proved  it  to  refer  to  a 
similar  occasion.  This,  however,  had  only  some  general 
heading,  not  stating  to  whom  the  discourse  was  actually 
addressed.  St.  Matthew,  following  his  usual  method 
of  procedure,  combined  into  one  address  to  the  Twelve 
the  discourse  in  St.  Mark,  and  that  from  the  Logia 
preserved  by  St.  Luke,  together  with  other  teachings 
to  the  disciples  found  in  St.  Mark  xiii  and  different 
passages  in  St.  Luke1.  St.  Luke,  on  the  other  hand, 
kept  the  two  accounts  in  St.  Mark  and  the  Logia  dis- 
tinct, referring  the  latter  to  another  sending  out  of 
disciples.  Possibly  there  existed  in  the  Gentile  churches 
a  tradition  of  a  mission  of  seventy  disciples  during  the 
course  of  the  ministry  of  Jesus. 

Inserted  in  the  address  to  the  Twelve  in  St.  Matthew  Further 
we   find  a   large   fragment  of   discourse,  which    seems  Jf0e^mg 
clearly  out  of  place  in  its  present  position,  as  its  con-  ciples. 
tents    obviously  have   reference   not   to    a   temporary  J^jj x" 
mission,  such  as  that  on  which  the  disciples  were  now  Luke  xii. 
engaged,  but  to  the  circumstances  of  their  wider  life-  5JI53  2~9' 
work,  which  lay  before   them  after  the  departure  of 
Jesus.     It  warns  them  of  the  treatment  which  they  are 
to  expect  at  the  hands  of  men,  when  they  set  out  on 
their  task  of  proclaiming  the  Kingdom,  and  the  course 
1  See  J.  A.  Kobinson,  Study  of  the  Gospels,  p.  86. 
M 


162    OUTLINES  OF  THE  SYNOPTIC  RECORD 

of  policy  which  they  are  to  adopt.  Part  of  the  discourse 
appears  in  St.  Luke  as  an  address  to  disciples  spoken 
on  a  separate  occasion  (chap,  xii),  though  it  is  there 
said  to  have  been  spoken  in  the  presence  of  'many 
thousands  of  the  multitude,'  which  in  view  of  the 
character  of  its  contents  is  manifestly  improbable. 

Jesus  opened  this  address  with  a  warning,  which  may 
have  been  a  proverbial  saying,  that  His  followers  are 
to  combine  the  wisdom  of  the  serpent  with  the  harm- 
lessness  of  the  dove ;  they  must  be  prepared  for  perse- 
cution at  the  hands  of  men ;  even  their  nearest  kinsfolk 
would  turn  against  them  ;  endurance  to  the  end  should 
be  the  test  of  the  true  disciple;  they  were  to  go  on 
undeterred  by  opposition,  when  persecuted  in  one  city 
flying  to  another ;  for,  indeed,  they  should  not  have 
1  completed '  the  cities  of  Israel  until  the  Son  of  Man 
should  come — clearly  a  reference  to  the  destruction  of 
Jerusalem.  (We  notice  that,  as  yety  no  hint  is  given 
that  their  preaching  is  to  be  extended  beyond  the 
Chosen  Race.)  They  must,  indeed,  expect  the  same 
treatment  as  that  accorded  to  their  Master  ;  that  teach- 
ing, which  He  had  now  given  them  in  secret,  they  were 
then  to  proclaim  to  all  men  without  reserve,  upon  the 
housetop ;  they  were  not  to  fear  men,  who  had  power 
over  the  body  only,  but  God,  who  could  destroy  eternally 
body  and  soul  alike ;  hence,  they  were  to  go  forward 
in  confidence,  knowing  that  they  were  in  the  keeping 
of  Him,  without  whom  not  a  single  sparrow  falls  to  the 
ground,  and  by  whom  the  very  hairs  of  their  head  were 
numbered.  If  they  boldly  acknowledged  Him  on  earth, 
He  would  acknowledge  them  before  the  hosts  of  heaven 
hereafter.  Jesus  then  explained  to  them  why  it  was 
that  they  must  expect  opposition ;  for  He  came  not  to 
send  peace  on  earth;  rather  it  was  His  mission  to  be 


CRISIS  OF  THE  GALILEAN  MINISTRY     163 

the  great  divider.     By  His  coming  He  forced  all  men 

to  range  themselves  on  one  side  or  the  other,  in  support 

of,  or  in  opposition  to,  His  claims.   Thus,  as  compromise 

was  impossible,  they  must  be  prepared   to   desert   all 

that  they  held  dearest  for  His  cause.     Jesus  concluded 

with  the  oft-repeated  announcement  of  what  following 

Him  would  mean  for   the  true  disciple  ;    he  must  be 

prepared  to  share  the  lot  of  Jesus  Himself :    '  He  that 

doth  not  take  his   cross  and   follow  after  Me,  is   not 

worthy  of  Me.     He  that  findeth  his  life  shall  lose  it; 

and  he  that  loseth  his  life  for  My  sake  shall  find  it.' 

In   connexion   with   this    address  we   may  notice  a  The  three 

passage,  placed  by  St.  Luke  early  in  his  ■  great  Insertion,'  tJ^Sisc?- s 

which  illustrates  the  conditions  demanded  by  Jesus  of  pleship. 

those  who  would  become  His  disciples.    The  Evangelist,  ^_q2^' 

or  his  source,  has  placed  together  three  instances,  the  Matt.  viii. 

19-22 
first  two  of  which  are  also  preserved  by  St.  Matthew, 

occurring  no  doubt  at  various  times  in  the  ministry, 
which  show  the  dealings  of  Jesus  with  different  indi- 
viduals who  aspired,  or  were  called,  to  join  the  band  of 
His  personal  followers.  On  one  occasion  when  a  certain 
man,  said  by  St.  Matthew  to  have  been  a  Scribe,  offered 
to  follow  Him  whithersoever  He  should  go,  Jesus  warned 
him  to  consider  what  such  an  offer  would  involve  :  '  The 
foxes  have  holes,  and  the  birds  of  the  heaven  have 
nests ;  but  the  Son  of  Man  hath  not  where  to  lay  His 
head.'  The  next  case  is  of  one  summoned  by  Jesus 
Himself  to  follow  Him.  When  the  man  asked  first  to 
be  allowed  to  go  and  bury  his  father,  he  was  met  by 
the  reply,  seemingly  almost  unfeeling  in  its  severity, 
1  Leave  the  dead  to  bury  their  own  dead ;  but  go  thou 
and  publish  abroad  the  kingdom  of  God.'  Whether 
the  man's  words  meant  that  his  father  was  actually 
waiting  burial  at  home,  or  only  that  he  wished  to  be 

M  2 


164    OUTLINES  OF  THE  SYNOPTIC  RECORD 

allowed  to   tend  his  declining  years   before   answering 
the  summons  of  Jesus,  the  force  of  our  Lord's  saying 
is  clear  enough.     For  him  who  had  received  the  call 
of  Jesus  there  could  be  no  delay  in  answering  it;  the 
claims  of  God's  work  were  urgent  and  paramount.     To 
those  claims  even  the  duties  of  natural  piety  must  give 
way ;  the  (spiritually)  dead  must  be  left  to  bury  their 
own  dead.     In  the  last  case  a  man  asked  to  be  allowed 
to  bid  farewell  to  his  friends  at  home  before  following 
Jesus.     Our  Lord,  however,  in  whose  view  such  a  re- 
quest implied  a  want  of  the  whole-hearted  self-devotion 
which  He  required  in  all  His  followers,  replied  with  the 
rebuke,  'No  man,  having  put  his  hand  to  the  plough, 
and  looking  back,  is  fit  for  the  kingdom  of  God.' 
The  Fears       The  extended  activity  of  Jesus  and  His  disciples,  to 
of  Herod.   w}1ic}1  the  mission  of  the  Twelve  gave  rise,  brought  the 
14-16.        fame  of  His  works,  together  with  the  conflicting  specu- 
Matt.  xiv.  lotions  which  prevailed  as  to  His  Person,  to  the  ears 
Luke  ix.     of  Herod.     The  news  aroused  in  his  guilty  mind  the 
'~9,  superstitious  dread  that,  in  the  Person  of  Jesus,  John, 

whom  he  had  beheaded,  was  risen  from  the  dead,  and 
inspired   the   tetrarch  with   a   desire   to   see   Him   for 
himself.     In  his  case  superstition  seems  later  to  have 
passed  into  enmity,  as  we  hear  how,  on  one  occasion, 
the  Pharisees  reported  to  Jesus  a  design  on  the  part  of 
Herod  to  kill  Him,  should  he  seize  Him  in  his  territory. 
Jesus'         Jesus,  however,  in  reply  told  them,  '  Go  and  say  to  that 
to^Herod    fox '  *^a*  ^s  mimstry  would  go  forward  undeterred  by 
Luke  xiii.  his  threats,  until    the   third   day,  i.  e.   until   the   time 
•        assigned  by  the  Divine  Counsels  for  its  completion  was 
fulfilled.     Here  the  term  'fox'  is  used  by  Jesus  with 
reference  to  the  craftiness  displayed  by  Herod  in  this 
attempt  to  get  rid  of  Him  from  his  territory  by  the 
threat  mentioned. 


CRISIS  OF  THE  GALILEAN  MINISTRY     165 

St.  Matthew  places  at  this  point  an  address  in  which  Woes  on 
Jesus,  reviewing  the  results  of  His  ministry,  passes  a  p1*1.®3  of 
stern  condemnation  on  those  cities  of  Galilee  which  had  Matt.  xi„ 
been  the  principal  scene  of  His  activity.     In  proportion  ?0_124, 
to  the  greatness  of  their  opportunities  should  be  the  13-15. 
severity  of  the  retribution  which  should  fall  upon  them. 
Thus  Chorazin  and  Bethsaida  should  fare  worse  than 
Tyre  and  Sidon,  Capernaum  than  Sodom  in  the  day  of 
judgement;    the  latter  town  especially,  His  own  city, 
should  be  visited  with  the  judgement  pronounced  by 
Isaiah ;  as  it  was  exalted  to  heaven  by  the  presence  of  Isa.  xiy. 
Jesus,  so  should  it  be  cast  down  to  hell  by  the  heavy 
judgement  which  it  should  incur. 

Jesus  had  doubtless  appointed  a  time  and  place  at  Return 
which  His  apostles  should  meet  Him  and  report  the  jy*  j  le 
results   of   their   mission.     There   they   assembled   and  Mark  vi. 
rendered  to  Him  a  full  account  of  their  work  and  teach-  j^'  Luke 
ing.     Their  success,  they  reported,  had  surpassed  their  17-20. 
own  expectations ;  they  particularly  mentioned  that  in 
His   name   they   had   been   able   to   subdue   even    the 
demons.     Jesus  declared  that  in  their  success  He  per- 
ceived the  overthrow  of   the  power  of  evil.     He  had, 
He  declared,  seen  the  fall  of   Satan  from  heaven,  as 
sudden  and  as  unmistakable  as  the  descent  of  a  flash 
of  lightning  to  earth ;  but  He  bade  them  rejoice,  not  so 
much  in  this  victory  over  the  powers  of  evil,  as  in  the 
assurance  that  their  names  were  now  enrolled  as  citizens 
in  the  heavenly  Kingdom. 

He  then  gave  expression  to  His  deep  joy  in  a  hymn  Hymn  of 
of  grateful  thanksgiving  to  God.     In  no  other  utterance  j^^'xi 
in  the  Synoptic  Gospels  does  Jesus  reveal  so  fully  His  25-30. 
consciousness  of   His  absolute   sympathy   in   will   and  21-24?' 
purpose  with  the  Father ;  in  fact,  in  style  and  tone  the 
utterance  is  closely  akin  to  the  discourses  of  the  Fourth 


166    OUTLINES  OF  THE  SYNOPTIC  RECORD 

Gospel.     He  thanks  the  Father  that  the  Divine  Revela- 
tion had  been  hidden  from  the  wise  and  prudent  in  the 
world's  estimation,  the  Scribes  and   religious   teachers 
of  the  nation,  and  revealed  to  these  simple  Galileans, 
babes  in  knowledge.     Such  was,  in  truth,  the  Father's 
will ;  yet  even  these  could  not  entirely  enter  into  His 
purposes,  since  none  but  the  Father  fully  knew  the  Son, 
just  as  none  could  fully  know  the  Father  and  share  His 
purposes  save  the  Son  Himself,  and  those  to  whom  He 
willed  to  reveal  the  Father  and  make  known  His  will. 
Then,  looking  out,  as  it  were,  in  loving  compassion  on 
the  world  of  men,  as  He  beheld  it,  wearied  and  heavy- 
laden  with  the  burden  of  sin  and  failure,  yet  receiving 
no   help   or   sympathy  from  the  hard  formalism   and 
barren  orthodoxy  of  the  religious  teachers  of  the  day, 
He    addressed    to    them    His    well-known    and   tender 
summons,  declaring  that  if  they  would  turn  to  Him, 
and,  throwing  off  the  bondage  of  hard  dead  rules,  take 
in  its  place  His  light  and  easy  yoke,  and  entering  His 
service  learn  His  meek  and  lowly  temper,  then  they 
should  indeed  find  the  rest  which  their  wearied  souls 
needed,  the  satisfaction  of  all  their  religious  cravings. 
The  Feed-       The  place  where  the  disciples  rejoined   their  Master 
the  Fi  e     mus^    have    been    some    well-known   resort    of    Jesus. 
Thousand.  St.   Mark   relates  that  there   were   many   coming  and 
31-44 V1      §omg>  and  s0  absorbing  were  the  demands  made  upon 
Matt.  xiv.  His  time  that  they  had  not  even  leisure  to  eat.     He, 
1  i    .        therefore,  bade  the  Twelve  withdraw  with   Him   into 

Luke  ix.  ' 

10-17.  a  desert  spot,  where  they  might  enjoy  greater  privacy, 
1-lB  V1  an(^  secure  the  rest,  both  physical  and  mental,  which 
He  saw  that  they  needed  after  the  trying  and  exciting 
experience  through  which  they  had  passed.  Yet,  once 
again,  their  intention  was  defeated  by  the  persistence 
of  the  people,  who  marking  their   departure  followed 


CRISIS  OF  THE  GALILEAN  MINISTRY     167 

them  in  crowds  from  every  quarter.  As  Jesus  beheld 
them,  His  heart  was  touched  with  compassion  for  these 
hungering  souls,  *  like  sheep  without  a  shepherd,'  and, 
sacrificing  His  own  intended  period  of  privacy,  He 
devoted  the  day  to  teaching  them. 

The  large  numbers  which  collected  on  this  occasion 
are  accounted  for  by  the  statement  in  the  Fourth  Gospel, 
that  it  was  the  Passover  season.  This  falls  in  with  the 
incidental  allusion  in  St.  Mark  to  '  the  green  grass '  on 
which  the  crowds  sat.  Thus  it  would  be  a  time  of 
general  holiday,  when  no  work  was  being  done,  while 
the  numbers  may  very  well  have  been  increased  by 
pilgrims  on  their  way  to  the  feast  at  Jerusalem.  The 
ensuing  miracle  is  fully  related  in  all  four  Gospels.  The 
multitude,  engrossed  in  listening  to  Jesus,  stayed  on, 
heedless  of  the  flight  of  time  and  the  approach  of  the 
evening.  As  the  day  began  to  close  in,  the  disciples 
came,  and  requested  Him  to  dismiss  the  crowds,  since 
provision  could  not  be  made  for  them  there  in  a  desert 
place.  In  reply  to  an  inquiry  of  Jesus,  they  reported 
that  they  had  no  more  than  five  loaves  and  two  small 
fishes,  carried  by  a  young  lad,  these  being  probably  the 
supply  for  the  evening  meal  of  our  Lord  and  His  com- 
pany. Jesus  bade  them  range  the  crowds  on  the  green 
grass  in  groups  of  hundreds  and  fifties ;  the  impression 
produced  by  these  groups,  with  their  bright-coloured 
costumes,  on  the  eye  of  the  beholder  was  that  of  a 
number  of  garden-plots  (-n-paa-tat,  Mark  vi.  40).  Jesus 
performed  the  part  of  the  head  of  the  family  in  blessing 
the  meal.  He  then  gave  the  loaves  and  fishes  to  the 
disciples  to  divide  among  the  crowds.  The  provisions 
thus  distributed  proved  sufficient  to  satisfy  all,  while 
the  broken  fragments  remaining  over  filled  twelve  stout 
wicker  baskets  (ko^lvol). 


168     OUTLINES  OF  THE  SYNOPTIC  RECORD 

The  miracle  is  related  in  both  the  Marcan  outline  and 
the  Fourth  Gospel  with  a  vividness  of  detail  and  a 
minuteness  of  description  as  to  points  of  time  and 
place  which  must  be  due  to  an  eyewitness.  It  has 
an  important  bearing  on  the  progress  of  the  ministry 
in  Galilee,  since  it  led  to  the  sudden  outburst  of  popu- 
larity and  the  subsequent  falling  away  of  the  populace 
from  the  cause  of  Jesus,  which  proved  the  crisis  of 
Effects  His  public  career.  The  Fourth  Gospel  brings  out  more 
Mh^l  clearly  than  any  of  the  other  accounts  the  deep  impres- 
John  vi.  sion  produced  by  the  miracle  on  the  minds  of  the 
' 15,  people.  The  act  aroused  the  general  enthusiasm  to  the 
highest  pitch,  falling  in,  as  it  apparently  did,  with  a 
prevalent  expectation  that  the  Messiah  at  His  coming 
would  perform  a  miracle  similar  to  that  of  the  feeding 
by  the  manna.  Such  a  proof  dissipated  the  former 
hesitation  to  accept  the  claims  of  Jesus.  The  crowd 
resolved  to  take  the  matter  into  their  own  hands  and 
compel  Him,  even  against  His  will,  to  place  Himself  as 
Messianic  King  at  the  head  of  a  popular  rising.  Never 
before  in  the  ministry  had  such  an  opportunity  presented 
itself.  Jesus  had  only  to  speak  the  word,  nay,  merely 
to  let  matters  take  their  course,  and  a  general  uprising 
in  His  favour  throughout  Galilee  was  assured.  He 
Himself  realized  doubtless  what  refusal  of  the  popular 
homage  at  this  moment  would  mean  for  Him ;  if  He 
disappointed  the  people's  expectation  now,  their  support 
would  be  lost  for  ever,  and  the  hierarchy  would  be  left 
to  work  their  will  upon  Him.  Yet  He  did  not  for  a 
moment  waver;  He  first  compelled  His  disciples  to 
enter  a  boat  and  put  out  on  the  lake,  that  they  might 
be  out  of  reach  of  the  danger  of  being  carried  away 
by  the  popular  excitement,  while  He  Himself  then  pro- 
ceeded to  dismiss  the  crowds. 


CRISIS  OF  THE  GALILEAN  MINISTRY     169 

In  view  of  this  new  and  important  development  of  Walking 
His  ministry,  Jesus  retired  into  a  mountain  to  pass  the  JtoJ^vL*" 
night  in  solitary  prayer.  The  disciples  meanwhile  were  45  52. 
toiling  on  the  lake,  making  little  way  against  a  head-  ^33  X1V* 
wind.  It  is  not  hard  to  imagine  the  bewilderment  John  vi. 
produced  on  their  minds  by  the  enforced  and  unexpected  "  ■ 
separation  from  their  Master,  and  the  exciting  events 
and  scenes  of  the  day  through  which  they  had  just 
passed.  Suddenly  they  descried  through  the  darkness 
the  form  of  Jesus  walking  on  the  sea ;  in  their  alarm 
they  believed  it  at  first  to  be  an  unearthly  apparition, 
until  they  were  reassured  by  the  tones  of  His  voice, 
*  Be  of  good  cheer  :  it  is  I ;  be  not  afraid.'  No  sooner 
had  they  received  Him  into  the  boat  than  the  wind 
dropped,  and  they  found  themselves  at  once  at  the  land. 
This  may  well  mean  that,  to  the  mind  of  the  Evangelist, 
in  the  presence  of  Jesus  all  danger  was  forgotten,  and 
he  lost  count  of  time  for  the  rest  of  the  crossing.  This 
would  appear  to  be  a  '  miracle  of  instruction.'  By  leaving 
His  disciples  to  cross  the  lake  alone,  and  then  in  their 
hour  of  need  revealing  Himself  to  them,  Jesus  doubtless 
was  training  them  to  realize  His  continual  presence 
with  them  and  to  trust  at  all  times  to  His  help. 
St.  Matthew  adds  that  Peter  was,  at  his  own  request, 
bidden  to  come  to  Jesus  on  the  water,  but  that,  losing 
courage  in  face  of  the  wind,  he  began  to  sink,  and  was 
saved  by  Jesus,  who  rebuked  him  for  his  failure  of 
faith.  This  incident  is  not  found  in  the  Marcan  source, 
where  we  naturally  look  for  Petrine  reminiscences ;  as 
it  is  also  wanting  in  the  Fourth  Gospel,  it  seems  likely 
that  it  is  due  to  a  confusion  with  the  incident  related 
in  John  xxi  after  the  Resurrection,  since  the  circum-  John  xxi. 

n 

stances  of  the  two  bear  a  good  deal  of  external  resem-    ' 
blance.     The  incident  has  been  sometimes  thought  to 


170    OUTLINES  OF  THE  SYNOPTIC  RECORD 

be  a  typical  representation  of  the  subsequent  fall  of 

the  apostle. 

St.  Matthew  relates  that,  on  their  reaching  land,  those 

in  the  boat,  meaning  apparently  the  disciples,  came  and 

worshipped  Jesus,  declaring  their  belief  in  Him  as  the 

'Son  of  God.'     No  mention  of  this  confession  occurs  in 

the  Marcan  tradition.     Still  it  is  in  no  way  improbable 

that  the  disciples,  impressed  as  they  must  have  been  by 

the  two  miracles  which  they  had  witnessed,  should  at  such 

a  moment  have  acknowledged  their  Master  as  Messiah, 

if  not  actually  as  Divine ;    yet  this  fell   short   of  the 

deliberate  confession  made  through  the  mouth  of  Peter 

at  Caesarea  Philippi,  at  a  time  when  the  tide  had  clearly 

turned,  and  the  cause  of  Jesus  was  no  longer  espoused 

by  the  populace. 

Return  to       On  their   arrival  at  the   district  of  Gennesaret,   the 

Gennesa-0  crowds   quickly  collected   again;    from   every   quarter 

ret,  and     came  those  bringing  sick  and   diseased  friends  to  be 

Markvi* '    nealed-     Indeed,  throughout  this  period  of  the  ministry 

53-56.        escape  from  this  continual  pressure  seemed  impossible 

34-36 X1V'  ^or  Jesus'   wherever  He  went,  in  villages  or  country 

alike,  He  was  thronged  by  numbers,  who  sought  merely 

to  touch  His  garment  in  order  to  receive  a  cure. 

Yet,  side  by  side  with  this  popularity,  the  severance 

from  the  religious   classes  continued  to  increase.     We 

hear  now  of  a  new  occasion  of  conflict ;  but  in  this  case 

we  find  associated  with  the  local  Scribes  a  deputation 

Dispute      from   the   leading  classes   at  Jerusalem.     The   present 

onTradi-    controversy  was  called  forth  by  the  attitude  of  Jesus 

tion.  J  J 

Mark  vii.    to  those  frequent  ceremonial  ablutions  which  were  the 

If  ij :  distinctive  feature  of  Pharisaic  religion.     The  Pharisees, 

Matt.  xv.  &  , 

1-20.  true  to  their  name  \  taught  that  the  primary  object  of 

the  strict  Jew  should  be  to  avoid  contact  with  all  persons 

1  Literally  •  separated  ones.' 


CRISIS  OF  THE  GALILEAN  MINISTRY     171 

or  things  which  were  Levitically  unclean.  With  this  end 
they  had  laid  down  a  code  of  minute  regulations  as  to 
the  ablutions  required  after  such  contact  with  the  cere- 
monially unclean  as  must  necessarily  be  incurred  in 
business  or  society ;  these,  not  being  commanded  in  the 
law,  they  claimed  to  base  on  oral  tradition.  They  now 
charged  the  disciples  of  Jesus  with  failing  to  observe 
these  regulations.  Jesus  replied  by  turning  the  attack 
on  themselves;  they,  in  pretended  deference  to  their 
human  traditions,  set  aside  the  direct  command  of  God, 
as  was  shown  in  their  violation  of  the  fifth  command- 
ment. Thus  they  evinced  the  spirit,  denounced  of  old 
by  Isaiah,  of  those  who  rendered  God  a  service  of  the  Isa.  xxix. 
lips  but  not  of  the  heart,  placing  the  commands  of  ' 
men  above  God's  ordinances.  He  then  turned  and 
addressed  the  multitude,  calling  their  attention  to 
the  importance  of  the  principle  which  He  was  about 
to  lay  down,  by  prefacing  it  with  the  words,  'Hear 
Me  all  of  you,  and  understand.'  He  declared  that 
not  pollution  from  without,  but  that  which  comes 
from  within  is  the  true  source  of  defilement  to  a  man ; 
that  it  was  not  ceremonial  but  moral  uncleanness 
that  they  were  to  shun.  So  entirely  novel  and  an- 
tagonistic to  the  current  teaching  of  the  day  was  such 
a  view,  that  His  disciples  came  afterwards  and  asked 
Him  for  a  further  explanation.  In  reply,  He  told 
them  that  the  Pharisaic  regulations  must  give  way, 
since  they  were  based  solely  on  human  laws  and  not 
Divine  commands.  He  came,  indeed,  to  do  away  with 
all  that  went  beyond  the  Divine  law.  'Every  plant 
which  My  heavenly  Father  planted  not,  shall  be  rooted 
up.'  Being  further  questioned  by  Peter  as  to  the 
meaning  of  the  utterance  to  the  people,  which  still 
seemed  to  him  enigmatical,  Jesus  pointed  out  explicitly 


172    OUTLINES  OF  THE  SYNOPTIC  RECORD 

that  the  true  distinction  of  clean  and  unclean  was 
a  moral  one ;  the  real  source  of  defilement  was  not 
anything  outside  a  man,  but  his  own  heart.  This 
utterance,  in  fact,  cut  at  the  root  of  the  old  ceremonial 
system.  St.  Mark,  recognizing  this,  calls  attention  to 
the  true  significance  of  the  principle  by  inserting  the 
note,  '  (This  He  said,)  making  all  meats  clean.' 
General  Thus  in  this  chapter  we  have  seen  the  popularity  of 

Summary.  jesug  ^  Qaiiiee  reach  its  highest  point ;  from  now  we 
begin  to  trace  its  decline.  With  the  miracle  of  feeding 
the  crisis  had  come  and  gone.  The  populace  had  been 
ready,  even  eager,  to  take  the  decisive  steps  to  place 
Him  on  the  throne  of  David;  Jesus  had  deliberately 
refused  to  avail  Himself  of  the  opportunity,  and  had 
put  aside  their  homage.  From  now,  at  any  rate,  the 
people  began  to  realize  that  His  Messianic  ideals  and 
their  own  moved  on  entirely  different  lines.  At  the 
same  time,  by  His  teaching  on  ceremonial  purification, 
striking,  as  it  did,  at  the  most  cherished  principle  of 
current  Judaism,  He  had  made  the  rupture  with  the 
religious  teachers  absolute  and  irreparable.  Thus,  with 
the  national  leaders  resolved  on  His  overthrow,  and 
the  tide  of  the  people's  favour  from  now  gradually 
beginning  to  ebb,  there  could  be  but  one  end  to  the 
ministry :  though  this  was  as  yet  perceived  by  Jesus 
alone,  He,  at  least,  was  under  no  delusion  as  to  the 
inevitable  issue. 


CHAPTER  XI 

THE    CLOSE    OF   THE  MINISTRY   IN   GALILEE 

Journey  to  Tyre  and  Sidon. — The  Syrophoenician  Woman. — 
Healing  of  Deaf  Man.— Feeding  of  Four  Thousand. — 
Request  for  Sign. — Leaven  of  Pharisees. — Healing  of  Blind 
Man. — Peter's  Confession. — Prediction  of  Sufferings. 

Mark  vii.  24-37,  viii,  ix.  1 ;  Matthew  xii.  38-42,  xv. 
21-39,  xvi;  Luke  ix.  18-27,  xi.  29-32,  xii.  1,  54-59  ; 
John  vi.  66-71. 

Jesus  had  now,  as  we  have  seen,  brought  to  a  close  Journey  to 
His  public  ministry  in  Galilee.     From  this  time  forward  £>1.s.tr^ct{{>t 
His  attention  was  more  exclusively  devoted  to  the  direct  sidon. 
instruction  of   the  Twelve.     His   previous   attempt  to  The  Syro- 
withdraw  with  them  into  seclusion  having  been  frus-  ciarf"1 
trated  by  the  zeal  of  the  crowd,  He  now  retired  in  their  Woman, 
company  far  away  beyond  the  north-western  border  of  24-30. 
Palestine   into   the   district   of  Tyre   and   Sidon.     His  Matt.  xv. 

21—28 

desire  that  their  coming  should  remain  unknown  is 
clearly  brought  out  by  St.  Mark,  who  says  that  'He 
entered  into  a  house,  and  would  have  no  man  know  it.' 
Yet  even  in  these  quarters  this  privacy  could  not  be 
maintained.  A  certain  woman,  'a  Greek,  a  Syrophoe- 
nician by  race,'  that  is  to  say,  a  descendant  of  the 
original  Canaanite  inhabitants  of  Palestine,  who  dwelt 
in  the  part  of  Phoenicia  belonging  to  Syria,  but  who 
herself  spoke  the  Greek  tongue,  hearing  of  the  arrival 


174    OUTLINES  OF  THE  SYNOPTIC  RECORD 

of  Jesus,  sought  Him  out  to  intercede  with  Him  on 
behalf  of  her  daughter,  who  was  possessed  with  an 
unclean  spirit.  She  followed  the  party  with  loud  cries 
as  they  left  the  house.  Jesus  was  reluctant  to  grant 
her  request ;  to  do  so  would  naturally  lead  to  other 
like  applications,  and  so  would  cause  interference  with 
the  seclusion  which  was  the  object  of  His  coming ; 
but,  besides  this,  to  do  a  miracle  for  this  heathen 
woman  would  violate  the  principle  which  He  had  laid 
down  for  Himself,  of  strictly  limiting  His  ministry  to 
members  of  the  Jewish  race.  Her  use  of  the  Messianic 
title  'Son  of  David'  has  been  held  to  show  that  she 
was  a  '  God-fearing '  proselyte ;  but  it  is  very  doubtful 
if  any  such  inference  is  to  be  drawn  from  this  form  of 
address.  Jesus  at  first  met  her  request  with  complete 
silence,  and  when  her  repeated  cries  led  the  disciples  to 
appeal  to  Him  to  dismiss  her,  declared,  '  I  was  not  sent 
but  unto  the  lost  sheep  of  the  house  of  Israel.'  Even 
when  casting  herself  at  His  feet  she  renewed  her  entreaty, 
He  only  repeated  the  ground  of  His  refusal  by  the  words, 
'  It  is  not  meet  to  take  the  children's  bread  and  cast 
it  to  the  dogs.'  Some  lay  stress  on  the  diminutive  here 
employed  (xwapia),  which  denotes  strictly  not  the  dogs 
who  prowl  about  the  streets  of  an  Eastern  city,  but  the 
house-dogs  living  with  the  family.  In  any  case,  the 
woman  found  in  the  term  a  gleam  of  hope;  for  she 
retorted  by  urging  that  even  the  dogs  have  their  place 
in  the  household,  that  they  are  at  least  entitled  to  the 
crumbs  which  fall  from  the  table  of  their  masters.  In  view 
of  her  importunity  Jesus  no  longer  held  to  His  refusal ; 
possibly,  indeed,  His  reluctance  had  been  throughout 
only  assumed,  in  order  to  prove  the  extent  of  her  faith. 
Finding  that  she  stood  the  test,  He  bade  her  '  for  this 
saying  go  thy  way,'  assuring  her  that  the   devil   had 


CLOSE  OF  THE  MINISTRY  IN  GALILEE     175 

departed  from  her  daughter.  The  woman,  accepting 
without  question  the  mere  assurance  of  Jesus,  returned 
home  to  find  the  child  cured.  We  have  here  the  only- 
case  in  the  Gospels  where  Jesus  had  to  deal  with  one 
who  was  probably  a  Gentile  in  every  sense.  By  the 
attitude  which  He  adopted,  He  made  it  clear  that  the 
favour  granted  was  of  a  quite  exceptional  character,  and 
not  to  be  considered  as  in  any  way  interfering  with  the 
strictly  Jewish  limitation  of  His  own  ministry.  At 
the  same  time,  a  possible  hint  of  a  future  extension  of 
the  Gospel  beyond  the  Chosen  Race  may  be  traced  in  the 
words,  '  Let  the  children  first  be  filled.' 

Possibly   a  report  of   the    miracle   got   abroad,  and 
hastened  their  departure  from  this  locality. 

Leaving  the  borders  of   Tyre   Jesus  now  journeyed  Journey 

north  through  Sidon ;  thence  turning  inland  He  passed  ^lrou»1J 

southwards  down  the  east  bank  of  the  Jordan,  along  the  and  Heal- 

region  of  Decapolis,  to  the  east  side  of  the  Sea  of  Galilee.  J?S  °f'? 
mi  •      t  iii  i  i  Deaf  Man. 

This  detour  probably  served  to  secure  the  opportunity  Mark  vii. 

for   privacy   which    He   sought    for   Himself   and   His  5J"i7, 

r  J  &      •  Matt.  xv. 

disciples.  29-31. 

Here  took  place  the  cure  of  a  man  who  was  deaf  and 

'had  an  impediment   in   his  speech.'     St.  Mark,  who 

alone  records  the  miracle,  notes  one  or  two  peculiar 

features  in   Jesus'    treatment   of   this   case :    to   avoid 

publicity  He  led  the  man  aside  from  the  crowd;   He 

then  first  placed  His  hands  in  his  ears  and  touched  his 

tongue,  and  looking  up  to  heaven  sighed  and  said  the 

Aramaic  word  '  Ephphatha,  that  is,  Be  opened ' ;    only 

then  were  his  hearing  and  speech  completely  restored. 

This  use  of  external   signs  was  probably  intended   to 

draw  out  the  requisite  faith   in   the   man  himself,  of 

which,  having  been  brought  by  his  friends,  he  had  given 

no  previous  evidence.    Jesus  gave  strict  commands  that 


176    OUTLINES  OF  THE  SYNOPTIC  RECORD 

absolute  secrecy  should  be  maintained  as  to  the  miracle, 
but,  as  so  often  happened,  the  very  strictness  of  His 
prohibition  only  led  to  greater  zeal  in  publishing  the 
news.  St.  Mark  mentions  the  general  astonishment 
produced  by  this  miracle,  which  found  expression  in 
the  words,  '  He  hath  done  all  things  well ;  He  maketh 
even  the  deaf  to  hear,  and  the  dumb  to  speak.' 

St.  Matthew,  who  omits  the  miracle,  relates  that  on 
Jesus  reaching  Galilee  large  crowds  came  to  Him,  bring- 
ing those  suffering  from  various  ailments,  and  that  He 
performed  a  number  of  cures.     It  is  quite  probable  that 
such  a  crowd  was  drawn  together  by  the  violation  of 
His  injunction  of  secrecy  as  to  the  healing  of  the  deaf 
and  dumb   man.     Here  we  have  another  instance   in 
which  Jesus  allowed  His  own  desire  for  privacy  and 
retirement  to  give  way  to  the  sympathy  evoked  by  the 
needs  of  those  who  sought  His  help.     Thus  the  mention 
of  a  number  of  cures  in  St.  Matthew  serves  to  account 
for  the  presence  of  the  crowd  which  gave  occasion  to 
the  following  miracle. 
Feeding  of     Jesus   continued  teaching   them,  probably   in   some 
the  Four    \one\j  part  0f  Decapolis,  for  three  days.     At  this  point 
Mark  viii.  our  first   two   Evangelists    record   another   miracle   of 
Jr1,0;  feeding.      The   circumstances  which   gave  rise   to   the 

32-39.  miracle  were  the  same  as  in  the  former  case.  I  he  mul- 
titude had  remained  listening  to  the  teaching  of  Jesus 
until  their  provisions  had  become  exhausted.  When 
Jesus  pointed  out  their  need  to  His  disciples,  they  were 
unable  to  suggest  any  expedient  to  meet  it.  He  there- 
upon, as  in  the  former  case,  made  them  make  the  people 
sit  down,  and  taking  of  such  scanty  provisions  as  could 
be  found,  amounting  only  to  seven  loaves  and  a  few 
small  fishes,  blessed  them,  and  bade  the  disciples 
set    them   before    the    people;    after    all    had    eaten, 


CLOSE  OF  THE  MINISTRY  IN  GALILEE     177 

there  still  remained  over  seven  basketfuls  of  broken 
pieces. 

The  question  has  naturally  been  suggested  as  to 
whether  this  incident  is  to  be  distinguished  from  the 
former  miracle  of  feeding  related  earlier  by  all  four 
Evangelists.  The  two  accounts  differ  indeed  in  certain 
points  of  detail.  Thus  all  our  narratives  distinguish 
in  the  two  cases  the  number  of  those  fed ;  in  the  former 
miracle,  five  thousand  men,  exclusive  of  women  and 
children  (so  all  the  Synoptists),here  four  thousand  men, 
1  beside  women  and  children  '  (Matthew,  but  not  Mark), 
and  the  amount  of  the  supply  provided, — there,  five 
loaves  and  two  fishes ;  here,  seven  loaves  and  a  few 
small  fishes  (IxOv&ia) ;  also  the  quantity  of  loaves  which 
remained  unused,  which  in  the  former  case  filled  twelve 
baskets  (Kocfuvoi),  here  seven  baskets  (o-</>u/H'Ses).  The 
fulness  of  detail  which  marked  the  former  narrative 
is  wanting  in  this  latter  case.  These  small  points  of 
difference,  however,  are  hardly  greater  than  might 
naturally  arise  in  two  independent  traditions  of  the 
same  incident.  In  that  case,  it  would  appear  that 
St.  Mark,  finding  in  his  sources  two  separate  accounts 
of  a  miracle  of  feeding,  differing  in  some  details,  con- 
cluded erroneously  that  they  referred  to  two  distinct 
incidents.  He  therefore  inserted  the  second  feeding 
here,  as  being  the  most  appropriate  place.  St.  Luke, 
with  truer  historical  perception,  omitted  the  second 
of  the  two  accounts.  Several  arguments  may  be  urged 
in  favour  of  this  view. 

(i)  There  is  a  close  correspondence  as  to  the  locality, 
occasion,  and  circumstances  of  the  two  miracles ;  while 
(ii)  it  appears  almost  impossible  to  account  for  the  failure 
of  faith  on  the  part  of  the  disciples  on  the  second 
occasion,  if  they  had  but  a  short  time  before  witnessed 

N 


178    OUTLINES  OF  THE  SYNOPTIC  RECORD 

the  power  of  Jesus  in  precisely  similar  circumstances, 
(iii)  Further,  it  would  seem  that  a  miracle  of  this  nature, 
which  would  be  sure  to  arouse  popular  excitement, 
would  have  been  out  of  place  at  this  period,  when  Jesus 
had  closed  His  public  ministry  in  Galilee,  and  was 
anxious  to  avoid  any  repetition  of  the  popular  demon- 
stration which  had  been  aroused  on  the  former  occasion. 
On  the  other  hand,  in  support  of  the  traditional  view, 
some  weight  attaches  to  the  fact  that  the  two  miracles 
are  already  distinguished  in  our  earliest  authority,  the 
Marcan  source,  winch  is  largely  drawn  from  the  remi- 
niscences of  Peter;  though,  of  course,  the  second 
narrative  of  feeding  need  not  necessarily  have  been 
based  on  a  Pe trine  tradition.  Further,  it  is  quite  likely 
that  here,  as  in  other  cases,  even  if  the  two  accounts 
referred  to  two  distinct  incidents,  some  confusion  as  to 
language  and  details  between  the  two  should  have 
arisen  owing  to  the  similarity  of  the  circumstances  in 
each  case.  Thus  the  failure  of  faith  on  the  part  of  the 
disciples  in  the  second  instance  may  have  been  intro- 
duced from  the  previous  miracle.  Little  weight  is  to 
be  attached  to  the  omission  of  the  second  miracle  by 
St.  Luke,  since  he  does  not  narrate  the  preceding 
journey,  and  only  rejoins  St.  Mark's  narrative  after  this 
miracle,  while  he  generally  tends  to  omit  the  second 
of  two  similar  incidents,  as  in  the  case  of  the  two 
anointings.  The  fact  that  Jesus  should  have  performed 
a  miracle  of  this  character  at  this  time,  thereby  defeating 
His  own  purpose  of  abstaining  from  any  step  likely 
to  arouse  popular  excitement  and  interfere  with  His 
retirement,  is  accounted  for  by  the  circumstances  of 
the  case,  and  the  compassion  aroused  in  Him  by  the 
necessities  of  the  multitude.  In  fact,  this  objection 
would  apply  almost  equally  to  the  earlier  feeding. 


CLOSE  OF  THE  MINISTRY  IN  GALILEE     179 

On  the  whole,  it  seems  best  to  leave  the  question  of 
the  mutual  relations  of  the  two  narratives  open;  the 
balance  of  probability  inclining,  perhaps,  rather  to  the 
view  that  they  represent  variant  traditions  of  the  same 
incident. 

After  this,  Jesus   went   by  boat   to   a   place    called  Request 
Dalmanutha  or  Magadan.     It  seems  probable  that  this  ^^  y|["' 
was  situated   on   the   eastern   shore   of   the  lake.     Its  11-13. 
position   is  however  quite  uncertain,  and  considerable  14 
doubt   exists  as  to  the  true  reading  of   the  name  in  xii.  38-42. 
St.  Mark.     No  sooner  was  He  back  in  this  region  than  54.59 xa* 
the  Pharisees  came  out  again  to  renew  their   attacks  xi.  29-32. 
upon  Him.     They  claimed  to   put  His   power   to   the 
test   by   demanding  a  sign  from   heaven;    not   merely 
an  act  of  healing  or  feeding,  but  some    unmistakable 
manifestation  in  the   sky,   direct  from  God,  which  all 
must   see   and    believe.      It   seems   that    this    was    an 
attempt  on  the  part  of  the  Pharisees  to  embitter  still 
further  the   relations   of  Jesus  with   the   people.     The 
Fourth    Gospel    had    related,    immediately    after    the 
feeding   of    the    Five   Thousand,   the   refusal   of  Jesus 
to   gratify   a   similar   request    of    the   multitude.      On 
that  occasion,  in  answer  to  their  demand,  'What  then 
doest  Thou  for  a  sign,  that  we  may  see   and  believe 
Thee  ? '    He  had  replied  by  pointing  them  to  the  evi- 
dence of   His  own  work  and  Person,  '/  am  the  bread 
of  life  '  (John  vi.  48).     And  here,  too,  He  refused  to  do 
a  sign  for  its  own  sake,  with  no  further  purpose  than  to 
gratify  curiosity,  or  to  force  belief  on  blind  and  sceptical 
hearts.     He  answers  that  the  men  of  that  generation 
shall  have  no  sign;    they  had  before  their  eyes  signs 
enough  already,  if  they  were  not  too  blind  to  see  them. 
They  can  discern  the  coming  weather  from  the  face  of 
the  sky ;  but  they  fail  to  read  aright  the  lessons  of  the 

N  2 


180    OUTLINES  OF  THE  SYNOPTIC  RECORD 

spiritual  horizon.  Yet  His  own  life  and  teaching,  and 
the  reception  which  they  met,  foreshadowed  clearly 
enough  the  coming  destruction,  and  no  further  sign 
than  this  should  be  granted  them.  The  men  of  heathen 
Nineveh  had  repented  at  the  preaching  of  Jonah,  yet 
the  men  of  His  own  day  would  not  listen  to  One  greater 
than  Jonah 1 ;  again,  the  heathen  Queen  of  Sheba  had 
journeyed  from  the  ends  of  the  earth  to  hear  the  wisdom 
of  Solomon,  yet  the  members  of  the  Chosen  Race,  though 
they  had  in  their  midst  One  greater  than  Solomon, 
heeded  Him  not. 

In  St.  Luke  Jesus  adds  to  the  saying  as  to  the  signs 
of  the  times,  a  warning  against  delay  in  making  recon- 
ciliation with  God,  referring  to  the  case  of  the  debtor 
who  must  make  terms  with  his  creditor  without  delay, 
lest,  when  legal  process  has  begun,  he  finds  it  too  late, 
and  be  cast  into  prison,  till  the  full  sum  is  paid.  This 
comparison  occurs,  as  we  have  seen,  in  the  Sermon  on 
the  Mount,  but  is  there  applied  to  reconciliation  with 
man. 

We  cannot  be  certain  whether  the  whole  of  this 
discourse  was  spoken  on  this  occasion ;  though  we  may 
well  suppose  that  this  was  the  case.  The  Marcan  source 
preserved  only  the  request  for  a  sign ;  the  reference  to 
Jonah  and  the  Queen  of  Sheba,  which  is  given  by  both 
St.  Matthew  and  St.  Luke,  clearly  was  contained  in  the 
Logia,  while  the  saying  as  to  the  signs  of  the  weather, 
which  in  the  true  text  is  given  only  by  St.  Luke, 
probably  came  from  the  same  source. 

1  The  addition  in  St.  Matthew,  referring  the  sign  to  the  fact  that, 
as  Jonah  was  three  days  and  three  nights  in  the  whale's  belly,  so 
should  the  Son  of  Man  be  three  days  and  three  nights  in  the  heart 
of  the  earth,  appears  to  be  a  gloss,  due  to  a  misunderstanding  of 
the  Evangelist.     See  Sanday's  Bampton  Lectures,  p.  432. 


CLOSE  OF  THE  MINISTRY  IN  GALILEE     181 

After  this  Jesus  left  them,  and  again  crossed  to  the  The 
other  side  of  the  lake.  On  the  way,  He  used  the  occasion  ^1™™ 
of  the  recent  dispute  to  warn  His  disciples  against  the  Pharisees. 
'leaven  of  the  Pharisees,'  the  influence,  that  is,  of  those  14*21 Vm* 
who  cloked  an  unspiritual  temper  under  a  pretended  Matt.  xvi. 
religious  zeal  ;    and  also  against  the  worldly  aims  and  ^akexii  1 
self-seeking   policy   which   constituted    'the   leaven   of 
Herod.'     Here,  again,  an  insight  is  given  us  into  the 
crude  literal  ideas  by  which  the  minds  of  the  disciples 
were  still  possessed;  since  they  supposed  their  Master 
to  be  making  some  reference  to  their  failure  to  take 
with  them  a  sufficient  supply  of  bread.    Jesus  corrected 
their  want  of  spiritual  understanding,  and  at  the  same 
time  rebuked  the  failure  of  faith  in  His  power  to  supply 
their  bodily  needs,  which  their   questioning  revealed,     • 
by  reminding  them  of   the  two   previous   miracles   of 
feeding. 

On   their  landing   at    Bethsaida,    a   blind   man  was  Healing 

brought  to  Jesus  to  heal.     This  miracle  also  is  recorded  °£a  Blnul 

Man. 
only  by  St.  Mark.      As  in   the  preceding   case,  Jesus  Mark  viii. 

adopted  peculiar  precautions  to  avoid  publicity.     He  22~26. 

led  the  man  outside  the  village  and  again  used  outward 

signs  to  effect  the  cure,  putting  spittle  on  his  eyes,  and 

laying  His  hands  on  them.    The  restoration  of  sight  was 

gradual,  probably  owing  to  the  lack  of  faith  in  the  man. 

At  first  he  saw  only  indistinct  figures,  men  as  trees 

walking ;  and  it  was  only  when  Jesus  again  laid  His 

hands  on  him  that  his  recovery  was  complete.     The 

further  to  secure  secrecy,  Jesus  sent  the  man  straight 

home,  forbidding  him  even  to  enter  the  village.     We 

see  clearly  that  it  was  His  object  not  to  continue  to 

practise  a  general  ministry  of  healing. 

And  now  Jesus  withdrew  once  more  with  His  disciples,  The  Con- 

this  time  to  the  extreme  north-east  of  Palestine,  into  Js^on  of 

Peter. 


182    OUTLINES  OF  THE  SYNOPTIC  RECORD 

the  region  round  Caesarea  Philippi,  which  lay  on  the 
east  side  of  the  Jordan  near  its  source,  and  within 
the  dominions  of  Philip  the  tetrarch.  The  events  of 
this  journey  are  of  the  utmost  importance  in  the  history 
of  the  training  of  the  Apostolic  band.  At  this  point, 
then,  it  may  be  well  to  recall  once  more  what  was  the 
position  which  Jesus  occupied  at  this  period  of  His 
career  in  relation  to  popular  opinion.  The  crisis  of 
His  public  ministry  was  passed.  A  little  before  this 
He  had  spoken  in  the  synagogue  at  Capernaum  the 
discourse  on  the  bread  of  life,  recorded  in  the  Fourth 
Cf.j  »lmvi.  Gospel.  From  that  time  forward  the  fluctuating  tide 
of  popular  opinion  had  set  decidedly  against  His  claims. 
The  people,  so  enthusiastic  in  His  favour  after  the 
miracle  of  feeding  that  they  had  tried  to  force  Him 
to  adopt  the  position  of  a  national  King,  had  now  veered 
round ;  they  realized  at  last  that  He  would  not  come 
forward  to  satisfy  their  crude  Messianic  expectations. 
And  so  there  followed  a  general  desertion  among  those 
who  had  been  inclined  to  form  a  party  in  His  favour. 
And  now  on  tins  lonely  journey  Jesus  forced  His 
disciples  to  face  the  actual  situation,  and  then  asked 
them  if,  in  view  of  the  general  falling  off,  they  too  would 
leave  Him.  In  answer,  Peter  expressed  the  common 
determination  of  all  by  declaring  that  after  their  ex- 
perience in  the  past  they  could  never  desert  Him  for 
any  other  master ;  they  had  found  that  He  alone  had 
'  the  words  of  eternal  life.' 

Jesus  then  proceeded  to  discuss  with  them  the 
popular  opinions  as  to  His  Person.  They  knew  what 
these  were :  some,  as  Herod,  thought  that  John  the 
Baptist  had  returned  to  life  ;  some  saw  in  His  work 
the  fulfilment  of  the  prophecy  of  Malachi  of  the  return 
of  Elijah ;  others  again  spoke  of  Him  as  Jeremiah,  who 


CLOSE  OF  THE  MINISTRY  IN  GALILEE     183 

was  commonly  identified  in  popular  expectation  with 
the  prophet  foretold  by  Moses ;  or  more  vaguely  as  one 
of  the  prophets.  After  they  had  enumerated  these 
varying  opinions,  Jesus  for  the  first  time  put  to  them 
the  decisive  question,  '  Whom  say  ye  that  I  am  ? '  For 
that  question  all  their  previous  intercourse  with  Him 
had  been  preparing  the  way.  During  all  that  time 
Jesus  had  never  questioned  them  as  to  their  faith  in 
His  Person,  and  had  never  directly  declared  to  them 
His  Messiahship.  He  had  allowed  the  conviction  to 
ripen  gradually  in  their  hearts  by  a  natural  process ; 
so  that  their  belief,  when  once  formed,  was  in  the  truest 
sense  their  own.  And  when  the  question  was  thus 
put,  Peter,  speaking  on  behalf  of  himself  and  his  fellow 
disciples,  expressed  without  hesitation  their  assurance, 
'  Thou  art  the  Christ.'  Jesus  recognized  in  the  words 
the  expression  of  a  deliberate  conviction,  springing  from 
no  momentary  or  passing  enthusiasm.  Peter  had  not 
learned  the  truth  as  the  result  of  any  human  instruc- 
tion ;  it  had  sprung  up  in  his  heart  from  the  seed  sown 
by  the  direct  inspiration  of  God.  Jesus,  therefore,  utters 
a  blessing,  recorded  by  St.  Matthew,  on  the  speaker, 
which  is  rendered  all  the  more  impressive  by  the  com- 
parative infrequency  with  which  our  Lord  passed 
such  commendation  on  His  followers.  He  then,  in 
St.  Matthew's  account,  went  on  to  address  to  Peter  the 
promise  rendered  familiar  by  the  controversies  to  which 
it  has  given  rise  :  '  And  I  also  say  unto  thee,  that  thou 
art  Peter  (ileVpo?),  and  upon  this  rock  (TreVpa)  I  will  build 
My  church ;  and  the  gates  of  Hades  shall  not  prevail 
against  it.'  The  words  are  clearly  addressed  to  Peter 
as  the  representative  of  the  Twelve.  His  confession 
had  shown  that  the  Apostolic  band  could  now  be 
definitely  recognized  by  Jesus  as  already  constituting 


184    OUTLINES  OF  THE  SYNOPTIC  RECORD 

His  Church,  the  new  Ecclesia  of  the  Messiah,  which  was 

to  take  the  place  of  Israel,  the  old  Ecclesia  of  God. 

(  f.  Hort,    In  the  Twelve  the   foundation-stone   of  the  Christian 

2'f!e.  ..         Church   had   been   already   laid,    and   from    that  time 

Christian  J 

Ecclesia,  forward  every  new  convert  who  was  brought  into  it 
v-  1 6.  would  be  but  a  fresh  stone  added  to  the  already  existing 
building.  To  this  He  added  a  further  promise  :  '  I  will 
give  unto  thee  the  keys  of  the  kingdom  of  heaven : 
and  whatsoever  thou  shalt  bind  on  earth  shall  be  bound 
in  heaven  :  and  whatsoever  thou  shalt  loose  on  earth 
shall  be  loosed  in  heaven.'  It  appears  that  by  these 
words  Jesus  entrusted  to  His  Church,  as  now  represented 
by  the  Twelve,  the  administration  of  the  keys  of  the 
Kingdom  of  Heaven,  meaning  thereby  the  truths  of 
the  Gospel ;  so  that,  by  giving  or  withholding  these, 
the  Church  should  decide  the  terms  of  admission  to  or 
exclusion  from  its  membership. 

He  then  strictly  enjoined  on  them  absolute  silence  as 

to  their  newly-acquired  knowledge.     The  fact  of   His 

Messiahship  was  as  yet  a  secret  to  be  confined  to  the 

circle  of  His  own  immediate  followers ;  the  time  for  its 

open  proclamation  had  not  as  yet  arrived. 

Announce-      The   Twelve    had    thus    stood    one    test ;    they  had 

Sufferiu  s  at^ame(l  t°  the  deliberate  assurance  that  their  Master 

Mark  viii.  was  indeed  the  Christ,  just  at  the  time  when  popular 

Matt  xvi    °Pmi°n  showed  unmistakable  signs  of  turning  against 

21-23.        Him.     But  this  led  Jesus  immediately  to  put  their  faith 

^2keix'      to  a  further  test.     Now  for  the  first  time  He  clearly 

proclaimed  to  them  the  nature  of  His  Messiahship  and 

the  fate  which  awaited  Him,  declaring  that  He  must  go 

up  to  Jerusalem  and  there  meet  rejection  and  death  at 

the  hands  of  the  Jewish  hierarchy.     As  yet  indeed  He 

gave  no  clear  indication  of  the  nature  of   the  death 

which   would   befall    Him,    or   of   the   part  which  the 


CLOSE  OF  THE  MINISTRY  IN  GALILEE     185 

Gentiles  were  to  play  in  its  execution.  But  with  this 
prediction  He  added  the  assurance  that  beyond  this 
apparent  failure  lay  the  final  victory ;  that  after  three 
days  He  should  rise  again.  The  very  idea  of  such 
a  termination  as  that,  which  was  thus  for  the  first  time 
explicitly  foretold  to  the  disciples,  was  as  yet  quite 
beyond  their  conception.  They  had  doubtless  come  by 
now  to  be  conscious  that  the  Messiahship  of  Jesus  was 
of  a  nature  quite  different  to  that  of  the  popular  idea ; 
but  even  yet  they  could  not  connect  the  Person  of  the 
Christ  with  the  thought  of  suffering  and  death.  And 
hence  Peter,  with  his  impetuous  zeal  for  what  he  con- 
sidered his  Master's  dignity,  led  Him  aside  and  boldly 
remonstrated  with  Him  on  an  idea  which  seemed  so 
unworthy  of  His  office.  Jesus,  however,  recognizing  in 
the  suggestion  of  His  own  disciple  a  repetition  of  that 
presented  to  Him  by  Satan  in  the  Temptation  on  the 
Mount,  which  would  have  led  Him  to  seek  success  by 
lowering  His  ideals  to  the  unspiritual  level  of  the 
popular  expectation,  turned  and  rebuked  him  with 
words  of  startling  severity,  exclaiming, '  Get  thee  behind 
me,  Satan  :  for  thou  mindest  not  the  things  of  God,  but 
the  things  of  men.' 

Fresh  from  this  momentous  conversation  the  little  Teaching 
band  rejoined  the  multitude.    And  now  Jesus  addressed  ^e3^C1' 
them,  too,  in  new  terms.     In  a  few  emphatic  words  He  Mark  viii. 
laid  down  for  all  the  law  of  self-sacrifice  as  the  necessary  MatT"xvi 
condition  of  discipleship  to  Him ;   but  He  went  even  24-28. 
further  than  this  by  showing  them  that  His  followers  93_oe7lx' 
must  be  prepared  to  undergo  death  in  its  most  shameful 
form,  even  though  it  should  be  the  crucifixion  of  the 
malefactor.     He  told  them  that  the  absolute  surrender 
of  self  in  His  cause  could  alone  lead  to  the  final  gain  of 
the  true  life,  and  compared  to  that  the  gain  of  the  whole 


186    OUTLINES  OF  THE  SYNOPTIC  RECORD 

world  would  be  as  nothing  :  '  for  whosoever  would  save 
his  life  shall  lose  it :  and  whosoever  shall  lose  his  life  for 
My  sake  and  the  gospel's  shall  save  it.'  And  what,  He 
asked,  would  the  gain  of  the  whole  world  be  in  com- 
parison with  the  forfeit  of  a  man's  own  life  ?  He 
declared  further  that  by  their  loyalty  in  acknowledging 
His  claims  now,  all  men  would  be  judged  hereafter. 
'  For  whosoever  shall  be  ashamed  of  Me  and  of  My 
words  in  this  adulterous  and  sinful  generation,  the  Son 
of  Man  also  shall  be  ashamed  of  him,  when  He  cometh 
in  the  glory  of  His  Father  with  the  holy  angels.'  And 
He  added  that  some  even  of  these  present  should  see  in 
their  own  lifetime  this  '  coming  of  the  kingdom  of  God 
with  power '  (St.  Mark).  What  the  allusion  is  in  these 
last  words  has  been  disputed.  Some  would  refer  them 
to  His  approaching  Transfiguration,  but  even  allowing 
the  possibility  of  such  a  reference,  it  cannot  be  held  to 
exhaust  the  meaning  of  the  prediction.  A  more  obvious 
explanation  would  find  their  fulfilment  in  the  destruction 
of  Jerusalem ;  while  yet  another  solution  would  make 
the  prophecy  more  general,  pointing  forward  to  '  the 
coming  of  the  Spirit,  and  the  power  manifested  in  that 
triumphant  march  of  the  Gospel  through  the  Empire 
which  was  already  assured  before  the  death  of  at  least 
some  of  the  original  Apostolate  V  Possibly  these  different 
interpretations  need  not  be  regarded  as  mutually  ex- 
clusive. St.  Matthew  has  altered  the  more  general  and 
doubtless  original  terms  of  the  saying  '  the  Kingdom  of 
God '  into  the  more  definite  reference  to  '  the  Son  of 
Man  coming  in  His  kingdom.' 

1  Swete,  ad  loc. 


CHAPTER  XII 
THE  TRANSFIGURATION  AND  AFTER 

The  Transfiguration.— The  Epileptic  Boy.— Journey  through 
Galilee.  —  Temple  Tribute.  —  Teaching  to  Disciples. — 
Parable  of  Labourers  in  Vineyard. — Parable  of  Unmerciful 
Servant. 

Mark  ix.  2-50,  x.  28-31 ;  Matthew  xvii,  xviii.  1-10, 
15-35,  xix.  27 -xx.  16;  Luke  ix.  28-50,  xvii.  7-10, 
xviii.  28-30. 

We  enter  at  this  point  on  a  new  stage  of  the  training  TheTrans- 
of  the  Twelve.     For  the  first  time  Jesus  had  definitely  figuration. 

J    Mark  ix. 

accepted  from  their  spokesman  the   acknowledgement  2  8. 
that  He  was  indeed  the  Messiah.     Yet  He  had  accom-  M:'t<:-  xvl1- 

1— o. 

panied  this  new  revelation  with  a  mysterious  intimation  Luke  ix. 
of  His  impending  fate,  which  clearly  caused  them  no  little  28~8fi- 
perplexity.  It  would  seem  that  to  Jesus  Himself  there 
was  nothing  new  in  the  announcement  which  He  had 
just  made.  He  had,  apparently,  long  recognized  what 
the  inevitable  issue  of  His  mission  must  be ;  even  from 
a  human  standpoint,  the  signs  of  the  time  must  to  Him, 
at  least,  have  been  clear  enough,  and  all  pointed  one 
way.  The  conviction  that  the  fulfilment  of  the  Divine 
Will  must  involve  for  Him  suffering  and  death,  after 
which  He  should  rise  again,  was  firmly  fixed  in  His 
mind ;  and  He  seems  from  now,  as  His  repeated  predic- 
tions show,  to  discern  more  and  more  clearly  the  very 
details  of  His  impending  fate. 


188     OUTLINES  OF  THE  SYNOPTIC  RECORD 

According  to  His  wont,  He  gave  His  disciples  a  brief 
space  in  which  they  might  turn  over  in  their  minds  the 
meaning  of  His  announcement.  Then,  after  six  days, 
Peter,  James,  and  John  were  admitted  to  a  yet  fuller 
view  of  the  Divine  dignity  of  His  Person,  and  the  true 
character  of  the  mission  ordained  for  Him  by  God. 

Accompanied  by  these  three  followers,  He  ascended 
a  mountain-top  for  the  purpose  of  spending  a  night  in 
solitary  prayer  to  God.  The  mountain  was  most  prob- 
ably not  Tabor,  as  tradition  asserts,  wThich  does  not 
satisfy  the  conditions  required,  but  Hermon,  which  was 
within  easy  reach  of  Caesarea  Philippi  and,  rising  to  a 
height  of  9,200  feet,  would  afford  the  solitude  necessary 
for  the  following  scene. 

While  Jesus  was  praying  on  the  mountain,  the 
disciples  beheld  His  countenance  illuminated  with  a 
brilliant,  unearthly  splendour;  there  appeared  also  to 
them  two  other  figures,  conversing  with  Him  ;  that  they 
were  able  to  identify  these  as  being  Moses  and  Elijah 
accords  with  the  hypothesis,  suggested  below,  that  the 
incident  was  a  kind  of  vision.  St.  Luke  mentions  the 
subject  of  their  conversation  as  being  '  of  His  departure 
(e'^oSo?)  which  He  was  about  to  accomplish  at  Jerusalem.' 
The  disciples  were  terrified  and  bewildered  at  finding 
themselves  thus  suddenly  admitted  into  the  presence 
of  beings  of  another  order.  Under  the  impulse  of 
such  feelings,  Peter  breaks  in  upon  the  scene  with 
the  random  exclamation,  'It  is  good  for  us  to  be 
here,' — in  this  new  world  of  heavenly  beings, — 'let  us 
make  this  our  abode,  and  set  up  three  tents,  one  for  Thee, 
one  for  Moses,  and  one  for  Elijah.'  It  is  just  such  a 
wild,  meaningless  utterance  as  might  rise  to  a  man's 
lips  in  a  moment  of  bewilderment  or  fear.  As  he  was 
speaking,  a  thick  cloud  overshadowed  the  group,  from 


THE  TRANSFIGURATION  AND  AFTER     189 

which  came  a  voice,  similar  to  that  heard  at  the  baptism 
of  Jesus,  'This  is  My  beloved  Son:  hear  ye  Him.' 
Filled  with  terror  the  disciples  fell  upon  their  faces,  and 
when  they  were  aroused  by  the  touch  and  words  of 
Jesus,  they  found  that  the  heavenly  visitants  had  dis- 
appeared, and  they  were  once  more  alone  with  their 
Master.  We  have  no  means  of  determining  what  was 
the  exact  nature  of  this  mysterious  manifestation.  We 
gather  from  St.  Luke's  account  that  the  three  apostles 
had  been  sleeping  on  the  mountain-top.  And  this  fact 
falls  in  with  the  impression  given  by  the  whole  character 
of  the  scene  that  the  appearance  was  of  the  nature  of 
a  vision,  which,  being  sent  direct  from  God,  was  seen 
by  all  three  simultaneously. 

But  whatever  view  we  adopt  as  to  the  character  of  Its 
the  manifestation,  it  is  not  hard,  when  we  connect  the    e9son5 
incident  with  the  point  at  which  it  occurs  in  the  ministry 
of  Jesus,  to  discern  the  permanent  lessons  which  it  was 
intended  to  convey. 

For  its  meaning  to  Jesus  Himself  we  may  compare 
the  similar  Divine  recognition  accorded  to  Him  at  the 
Baptism.  Even  if  He  gained,  at  this  time,  no  quickening 
of  the  consciousness  that  He  was  the  Messiah,  since  of 
that  He  needed  now  no  further  reassurance,  yet,  just 
as  the  voice  at  the  Baptism  was  a  pledge  of  Divine 
favour  in  view  of  the  opening  of  His  public  work,  so 
this  scene  and  the  voice  from  Heaven  may  have 
strengthened  Him  with  a  new  assurance  of  that  favour 
in  view  of  the  close  of  His  ministry  which  He  already 
clearly  foresaw. 

To  the  three  chosen  witnesses  its  deeper  meaning,  no 
doubt,  only  gradually  revealed  itself ;  yet  it  served  to 
interpret  the  strange  announcement,  lately  made  to 
them  by  their  Master,  that  He  must,  in  the  fulfilment 


190    OUTLINES  OF  THE  SYNOPTIC  RECORD 

of  the  Divine  Counsels,  undergo  rejection,  suffering,  and 
death.  They  could  turn  back  to  the  vision  for  support 
and  reassurance  in  face  of  the  disappointment  to  their 
material  hopes  which  the  future,  even  more  than  the 
immediate  present,  had  in  store  for  them.  Two  truths 
in  particular  seem  to  have  been  taught  them  by  the 
incident. 

(i)  The  conversation  with  Moses  and  Elijah,  the  repre- 
sentatives of  the  two  parts  of  the  Old  Covenant,  the 
Law  and  the  Prophets,  concerning  their  Master's  coming 
death  showed  them  that  the  exaltation  of  the  Messiah 
through  suffering,  inconceivable  as  such  a  conception 
appeared  to  prevalent  popular  ideas,  was  indeed  that  to 
which  all  the  old  Scriptures  pointed  forward.  Thus  the 
vision  impressed  on  them  more  clearly  than  any  words 
that  the  suffering  and  death  were  in  truth  the  divinely 
ordained  path  through  which  the  Messiah  should  enter 
into  His  glory. 

(ii)  Further,  the  words  of  the  Divine  voice,  which  they 

then  heard,  proclaimed  that  from  now  the  old  order, 

as  represented  in  its  two  leading  figures,  was  to  give 

place  to  the  New  Order,  inaugurated  by  the  Divine  Son. 

Latham,     '  Moses  and  Elijah,  the  teachers  of  Israel,  lay  down  their 

PasZrum     functi°ns  in  the  presence  of  the  chosen  three,  who  hear 

p.  95.  their  Master  owned  as  God's  own  Son,  to  whom  the 

world  is  henceforth  to  listen.' 

Jesus  did  not  indeed  declare  to  them  at  the  time 

the  important  truths  conveyed  by  the  vision ;   rather, 

as  so  often,  He  left  the  beholders  gradually  to  draw  out 

its  underlying  meaning  in  the  light  of  later  experience. 

The  Con-        As  they  descended  from  the  mountain  on  the  following 

duringthe  mormng>  He  instructed  them  that  they  were  to  tell  no 

Descent      man  what  they  had  seen,  '  save  when  the  Son  of  Man 

Mountain.  snould  have  risen  again  from  the  dead.'    Thus  this  fuller 


THE  TRANSFIGURATION  AND  AFTER     191 

glimpse   of  the  heavenly  majesty  of  Jesus  was  to  be  Mark  ix. 
a  cherished  secret,  entrusted  only  to  the  chosen  three ;  jj^*  xvii 
probably  they  alone  of  the  disciples  were  as  yet  ripe  9-13. 
to  receive  such  a  revelation.      The   privilege  of   such 
a  trust  marked  out  still  more  clearly  the  selection  of  an 
inner  circle  within  the  Apostolic  band.   The  same  chosen 
three,  who  had  already  been  present  at  the  victory  over 
death  in  the  house   of  Jairus,  were  admitted  on  this 
occasion  to  a  glimpse  of  their  Master's  Divine  glory, 
and   later  were  witnesses   of   the   mysterious   struggle 
in  the  Garden  of  Gethsemane. 

The  disciples,  as  they  went,  discussed  among  them- 
selves the  meaning  of  their  Master's  reference  to  '  the 
rising  again  from  the  dead,'  which  they  now  heard  for 
the  first  time.  The  scene  which  they  had  witnessed 
suggested  to  them  to  question  Jesus  as  to  the  meaning 
of  the  article  in  the  Messianic  creed  of  the  Scribes, 
which,  on  the  ground  of  the  prophecy  of  Malachi, 
declared  that  the  Messiah  was  to  be  preceded  by  Elijah. 
Were  they  to  find  the  fulfilment  of  this  expectation 
in  the  appearance  of  Elijah  on  the  mountain?  Yet  in 
that  case,  they  would  imply,  how  could  it  be  said  that 
Elijah  had  preceded  the  Messiah,  seeing  that  Jesus' 
ministry  had  begun  long  since  ?  Jesus  replied  that  the 
Scriptures  did  indeed  state  that  Elijah  was  to  come  to 
inaugurate  the  Messianic  era,  '  restoring  all  things.'  He 
then  went  on  to  meet  their  question  on  the  interpretation 
of  Scripture  with  another  :  what  did  the  Scriptures  mean 
by  the  prophecies  of  a  suffering  Messiah  ?  The  answer 
to  the  former  really  carried  with  it  the  answer  to  the 
latter  question.  Let  them  recognize  that  Elijah  had 
indeed  come  in  the  person  of  John  the  Baptist,  and  by 
his  rejection  and  death  met  the  fate  foreshadowed 
by  the  sufferings  of  Elijah  himself ;  the  issue  of  John's 


192    OUTLINES  OF  THE  SYNOPTIC  RECORD 

mission  would  then  make  it  easier  for  them  to  under- 
stand the  inevitable  issue  to  which  the  Scriptures 
pointed  in  the  case  of  the  Messiah.  The  suffering  and 
death  of  John,  so  far  from  precluding  his  true,  though 
unrecognized,  claim  to  be  the  forerunner,  i.  e.  Elijah, 
really  satisfied  the  requirements  of  Scripture ;  so,  too, 
the  rejection  and  suffering  of  Jesus  did  not  preclude 
His  true,  though  unrecognized,  claim  to  be  the  Messiah 
foretold  in  Scripture.  In  this  way  Jesus  used  the 
opening  afforded  by  their  question  to  insist  afresh  on 
the  same  truth,  that  the  Scriptures  pointed  forward 
to  a  suffering  Messiah. 
The  Epi-  At  the  foot  of  the  mount  a  singular  scene  met  their 
Mark  ix^  e^es*  ^ney  * ound  a  large  crowd  collected  round  the 
14-29.  disciples,  who  were  engaged  in  a  discussion  with  some 
14a^xvll'of  the  Scribes.  The  crowd,  astonished  and  overawed 
Luke  ix.  at  the  sudden  and  opportune  appearance  of  Jesus,  ran 
and  greeted  Him.  He  inquired  the  cause  of  the  alterca- 
tion, whereupon  one  of  them  came  forward,  and  related 
how  he  had  brought  his  son,  who  was  suffering  from 
a  severe  species  of  periodic  epilepsy,  to  the  disciples 
to  be  cured ;  this  they  had  tried  to  do,  and  failed  in  the 
attempt.  The  Scribes  had  doubtless  seized  the  oppor- 
tunity to  taunt  them  with  their  failure,  and  to  throw 
doubts  on  the  power  of  Jesus  Himself.  The  whole 
scene,  illustrating  as  it  did  the  various  elements  of 
human  evil, — the  perverse  malice  of  the  Scribes,  the 
fickleness  of  the  multitude,  the  weak  faith  both  of 
the  father  of  the  boy  and  of  the  disciples,— weighed 
heavily  on  the  heart  of  Jesus,  and  drew  from  Him  words 
of  stern  reproof :  '  O  faithless  and  perverse  generation/ 
He  exclaimed,  '  how  long  shall  I  be  with  you  ?  how  long 
shall  I  bear  with  you  ? ' 

No  sooner  was  the   child  brought  to  Jesus  than  he 


"-43a 


THE  TRANSFIGURATION  AND  AFTER     193 

was  seized  by  a  fresh  paroxysm,  and  fell  down  foaming. 
Jesus  first  inquired  of  the  father  of  how  long  standing 
the  malady  was.  The  inquiry  was  intended  probably 
to  calm  and  reassure  him.  The  man  replied  that  he 
had  been  subject  to  it  from  a  child,  and  then  gave 
a  description  of  the  violence  of  the  symptoms,  ending 
with  the  piteous  appeal,  '  But  if  Thou  canst  do  anything, 
have  compassion  on  us,  and  help  us.'  Jesus,  taking  up 
the  last  words,  reproved  the  doubt  which  underlay  them : 
'  If  Thou  canst !  All  things  are  possible  to  him  that 
believeth.'  As  if  to  say,  it  depends  not  on  My  power, 
but  on  your  faith.  The  man  responded  with  the  cry, 
'  I  believe  :  help  Thou  mine  unbelief.' 

Perceiving  the  crowd  collecting  again,  Jesus  saw  that 
it  was  inexpedient  further  to  prolong  the  scene.  Ad- 
dressing the  evil  spirit,  He  commanded  it  to  depart 
from  the  child,  and  return  no  more.  The  act  of  cure 
was  accompanied  by  a  fresh  seizure,  which  left  the  boy 
lying  on  the  ground  like  one  dead,  so  that  the  bystanders 
exclaimed,  '  He  is  dead.'  Jesus,  however,  taking  him 
by  the  hand,  raised  him  up,  and  restored  him  to  his 
father  completely  cured. 

When  they  were  alone  in  the  house,  the  disciples  came 
and  asked  Jesus  why  it  was  that  they  had  failed  in  this 
case  to  expel  the  evil  spirit.  Jesus  replied  that  the 
cause  lay  in  their  own  want  of  faith.  They  had  trusted 
solely  to  the  miraculous  powers  with  which  they  had 
been  endowed,  and  so  had  not  sought  the  Divine  help, 
without  which  they  were  powerless  against  powers  of 
evil  of  such  malignity  as  this  one.  '  This  kind,'  He  told 
them,  '  can  come  out  by  nothing,  save  by  prayer.' 

Jesus  now  set  out  once  more  with  the  Twelve  on  a  Journey 
journey  through  Galilee,  taking  measures  to  keep  their  S1™}1^1 
route  secret,  that  no  fresh  intrusion  might  break   in  and  Second 

o 


194    OUTLINES  OF  THE  SYNOPTIC  RECORD 

Teaching    on  their  intercourse.     He   used  the  opportunity   thus 

on  Suf-       afforded   to    repeat    again   in   still    plainer  terms   His 

ienngs.  x  °  *■ 

Mark  ix.     teaching   as   to    His    impending   betrayal,    death,   and 

??~?J2,    ••  resurrection.     We  notice  how  these  predictions  become 

Matt.  xvn.  x 

22, 23.  gradually  more  explicit.  He  now,  for  the  first  time, 
4?>k451X  makes  mention  of  His  betrayal.  The  disciples  were, 
however,  still  too  firmly  rooted  in  their  preconceived 
notions  of  His  Messianic  dignity  to  grasp  an  idea  so 
utterly  beyond  their  mental  horizon ;  they  quite  failed 
to  understand  His  words,  thinking  probably  that  they 
were  not  to  be  taken  literally,  and  yet  they  were  afraid 
to  inquire  of  Him  concerning  their  meaning.  Jesus 
Himself  gave  them  no  further  explanation ;  He  left  these 
repeated  warnings  gradually  to  fix  themselves  in  their 
minds,  knowing  that  their  meaning  could  only  be  made 
plain  to  them  by  the  actual  fulfilment. 
The  It  may  have  been  on  their  return  to  Capernaum  that 

Tribute  ^e  collectors  of  the  temple  tribute  came  to  Peter,  in 
Matt.  xvii.  whose  house,  it  would  seem,  Jesus  was  lodging,  with 
24-27.  ^e  jnqUiryj  t  Doth  not  your  Master  pay  the  didrachma  ? ' 
This  referred  to  the  tribute  of  half  a  shekel  which  every 
adult  male  Israelite  was  required  to  contribute  to  the 
maintenance  of  the  temple  services.  Probably  owing 
to  their  absence  on  the  recent  journey  the  toll  had 
remained  unpaid.  Whether  the  form  of  the  question 
implied  a  suggestion  that  Jesus  as  the  Messiah  might 
claim  exemption  from  this  obligation,  it  is  impossible  to 
determine.  In  that  case  the  demand  may  have  been 
another  attempt  to  force  Him  to  formulate  His  Messianic 
claims.  Peter  without  hesitation  answered,  '  Yes.'  He 
had  evidently  seen  as  yet  nothing  in  the  usual  practice 
of  his  Master  to  lead  him  to  doubt  that  He  would 
submit  to  the  requirements  expected  of  a  pious  Jew. 
Jesus,   however,  wished   His   disciples   to   realize   that 


THE  TRANSFIGURATION  AND  AFTER     195 

a  new  order  had  begun,  and  that  for  its  members  the 
obligations  of  the  old  system  were  no  longer  binding. 
As  soon  as  Peter  entered  the  house,  He  first  put  to  him 
the  question,  '  What  thinkest  thou,  Simon  ?  the  kings 
of  the  earth,  from  whom  do  they  receive  toll  or  tribute  ? 
from  their  sons,  or  from  strangers  ? '  And  when  Peter 
answered,  'From  strangers,'  He  drew  the  conclusion, 
'Therefore  the  sons  are  free.' 

This  last  sentence  contained  the  central  lesson  which 
He  wished  to  impress  on  the  minds  of  the  disciples.  Jesus 
Himself,  as  Messiah,  was  free  from  this  impost,  which 
implied  for  those  who  submitted  to  it  the  relationship 
to  God  of  subjects  to  a  king.  But,  indeed,  under  this 
new  order,  introduced  by  Jesus,  all  members  of  the 
Kingdom  were  henceforth  '  sons  of  God,'  and  so  exempt 
from  the  claim  for  payment.  Nevertheless  Jesus  in  this 
instance,  following  His  constant  practice,  conformed  to 
an  obligation  which  He  showed  to  be  no  longer  binding, 
since  refusal  would  only  create  misunderstanding  ;  '  lest,' 
as  He  said,  '  we  cause  them  to  stumble.'  He,  therefore, 
bade  Peter  go  fishing,  promising  him  that  he  would  find 
a  stater 1  in  the  mouth  of  the  first  fish  which  he  took ; 
with  this  he  was  to  make  payment  for  them  both. 

This  miracle  has  not  unnaturally  appeared  to  some  to  Miracle  of 
be  purposeless  and  unnecessary ;  we  gather  from  Peter's  the  p^g 
prompt  answer  that  there  was  no  difficulty  in  providing  Mouth. 
the  required  sum ;  further,  the  miracle  would  seem  to 
violate  the  principle  usually  observed  by  Jesus  of  not 
employing  His  miraculous  power  to  supply   His   own 
wants,  or  to  provide  what  could  be  procured  by  ordinary 
means.     Possibly,  some  misunderstanding  of  the  words 
of  Jesus  may  have  crept  into  the  tradition  as  it  reached 
our  first  Evangelist.  It  seems  a  not  unreasonable  solution 


O  2 


196    OUTLINES  OF  THE  SYNOPTIC  RECORD 


Disputes 
of  Dis- 
eiples 
as  to  Pre- 
cedence. 
Mark  ix. 
33-37. 
Matt.xviii, 
1-5. 

Luke  ix. 
46-48. 


Teaching 

on 

Humility 


to  suppose  that  Peter  was  told  to  gain  the  sum  required 
in  the  course  of  his  ordinary  occupation  by  selling 
the  first  fish  that  he  caught.  However,  in  any  case, 
the  important  lesson  of  the  incident  is  contained  in  the 
saying  of  Jesus.  His  words  really  implied  that  for  His 
followers  the  temple  service  was  abolished,  since  the 
obligation  to  support  it  was  done  away  with.  Here,  again, 
Peter  could  not  at  the  time  have  understood  how  far- 
reaching  was  the  principle  involved;  yet  the  lesson 
conveyed  would  lie  dormant  in  his  mind,  and  recur  to 
him  when  the  circumstances  of  the  Church  called  for  its 
application. 

In  the  course  of  the  walk  to  Capernaum  the  Twelve 
had  been  engaged,  as  they  went,  in  disputing  as  to  the 
precedence  to  be  assigned  to  each  in  the  coming  Messianic 
Kingdom.  Possibly  some  jealousy  may  have  been  caused 
by  the  preference  given  to  the  three  favoured  disciples. 
At  any  rate,  the  fact  of  such  a  dispute  at  this  juncture 
is  significant,  as  showing  how  entirely  their  minds  were 
still  preoccupied  with  the  prevalent  materialistic  ideas. 
Their  conversation  stands  in  striking  contrast  to  that 
teaching  which  their  Master  was  even  then  seeking  to 
impress  upon  them.  Jesus  at  the  time  allowed  the 
dispute  to  pass  unchecked.  In  the  house,  however,  He 
called  them  to  Him  and  inquired  what  they  had  been 
so  eagerly  discussing  by  the  way;  a  question  which 
they  could  only  meet  with  a  shamefast  silence,  showing 
thereby  that  they  had  at  least  so  far  profited  by  His 
teaching  as  to  recognize  that  such  materialistic  ideals 
would  meet  with  no  sympathy  from  their  Master.  He 
then  used  the  opportunity  to  set  before  them  the 
humility  which  was  to  be  characteristic  of  His  followers. 
For  them,  true  greatness  should  consist  in  the  spirit  of 
service :    *  If  any  man  would  be  first,  he  shall  be  last 


THE  TRANSFIGURATION  AND  AFTER     197 

of  all,  and  minister  of  all.'  This  new  conception  of 
ambition  He  impresses  upon  them  by  a  striking  object 
lesson.  Calling  a  little  child  to  Him  and  placing  him 
in  the  midst  of  them,  He  declares  that  if  they  would 
enter  the  Kingdom  of  Heaven  they  must  lay  aside  all 
self-seeking  and  desire  of  personal  pre-eminence;  they 
must  '  turn,  and  become  as  little  children ' ;  the  first 
essential  for  entrance  to  the  Kingdom  was  the  child- 
like temper  of  unassuming  humility,  the  consciousness 
of  their  own  weakness  and  dependence,  the  openness  of 
mind  which  could  alone  receive  new  truths.  He  then 
added  that  in  receiving  one  such  little  one  they  would 
be  receiving  Jesus  Himself,  and  thus  too  would  be 
receiving  the  Father  who  sent  Him.  Let  them  beware 
then  how  they  rejected  even  the  weakest  and  most 
imperfect  of  His  followers.  This  spirit  of  true  humility 
was  the  best  antidote  to  any  form  of  intolerance. 

These  last  words  seem  to  have  aroused  misgiving  in  the  Misunder- 
mind  of  John  as  to  whether  he  himself  had  not  been  ofDis-11^ 
guilty  of  such  intolerance  on  a  recent  occasion.    Anxious  ciples. 
to  learn  Jesus'  view  on  the  point,  he  mentions  a  case  38_41 
which  had  met  them  probably  on  their  recent  circuit  Luke  ix. 
of  preaching.     They  had  found  an  exorcist  making  use     ' 
of  the  name  of  Jesus,  on  his  own  authority,  to  expel  evil 
spirits.     They  tried  to  hinder  the  man,  resenting  this 
assumption   by   an    outsider    of   a   power   which   they 
regarded  as  belonging  exclusively  to  their  own  body. 
Jesus  replied  that  they  had  been  wrong  in  doing  so. 
The  power  to  do  a  work  in  His  name  proves  a  man 
a  disciple  at  heart :  such  a  man,  He  declared,  could  not 
lightly  speak  evil  of  Him  :   '  He  that  is  not  against  us  is 
for  us.'     Further,  not  even  the  humblest  act  of  kind- 
ness, such  as  giving  a  cup  of  cold  water,  shown  to  one 
of  His  disciples  for  Christ's  sake  should  go  unrewarded. 


198     OUTLINES  OF  THE  SYNOPTIC  RECORD 

The  Future     Jesus  had  frequently  to  deal  with  similar  misunder- 
Recom-       standings  on  the  part  of  His  disciples ;    He  invariably 
the  Dis-     showed  that   He  would  countenance   neither  personal 
ciples.        rivalry  nor  material  ambition.    One  parable  in  particular, 
28-31.  *      that  of  the  Labourers  in  the  Vineyard,  was  designed  to 
^-so X1X'  reDuke  any  such  false  motives.     This  parable  is  related 
Lukexviii.  only  by  St.  Matthew,  and  connected  by  him  with  the 
28-30.        incident  of  the  rich  young  man  and  the  question  of 
Peter,  which  may  have  been  suggested  by  that  incident, 
'  Lo,  we  have  left  all,  and  followed  Thee ;  what  then  shall 
we  have  ? '    Jesus   replied   indeed   that   they   who   had 
followed  Him  on  earth  should  in  His  coming  Messianic 
Kingdom,  in  '  the  regeneration,'  be  associated  with  the 
Matt.  xix.  Son  of  Man  in  judging  their  fellow  countrymen :    '  Ye 
also  shall  sit  upon  twelve  thrones,  judging  the  twelve 
tribes   of    Israel.'     In    this    promise,   related    only   by 
St.  Matthew,  Jesus  seems  to  picture  the  coming  judge- 
ment, in  which  His   disciples   should   share,  in   terms 
comprehensible    to    their    own    Messianic    ideas.      He 
further  added  that  no  sacrifice  made  for  Him  on  earth 
should    go    unrewarded :    a    man    should    receive    an 
hundredfold  even   in   this  world  for   all   he   had   left, 
houses,  brethren,  parents,  children,  or  lands ;   for  these 
would  be  replaced  by  the  new  spiritual  relationships  into 
which  he  should  enter,  the  common  possessions  which  he 
should  share,  as  a  member  of  the  Christian  brotherhood, 
though  with  them,  St.  Mark  adds,  he   should   receive 
persecutions,  and  in  the  age  to  come  eternal  life. 
Yet,  as  if  to  rebuke  the  misconception,  which  Peter's 
Parable      question  betrayed,  as  to  the  spirit  and  motive  for  God's 
of  the         service,  Jesus  added  the  following  parable  : — A  house- 
in  the        holder  at  the  time  of  vintage  went  out  at  different  hours 
Vineyard.  0f  the  day  and  engaged  labourers  to  work  in  his  vineyard : 
1-16.'         at  evening  all  alike  received  the  full  day's  wage  of  a 


THE  TRANSFIGURATION  AND  AFTER     199 

penny,  no  account  being  taken  of  the  time  for  which  each 
had  worked.  When  those  who  had  been  first  hired  com- 
plained at  the  action  of  their  employer,  he  replied  that 
they  had  received  the  wage  promised  to  them,  and  that 
he  was  entitled  '  to  do  what  he  would  with  his  own.' 

Jesus  thereby  showed  that  God's  reward  was  not  to 
be  regarded  as  wages  due  to  men,  in  exact  proportion 
to  the  amount  of  work  done.  No  man  indeed  could 
establish  any  claim  on  Him ;  so  that  entrance  into  the 
blessings  of  His  Kingdom  was  not  to  be  regarded  in  the 
light  of  a  reward  for  merit,  yet  at  the  last  He  would 
pay  all  alike  fully  and  generously  :  '  Each  man  would 
receive  his  penny.'  Nevertheless,  seeing  that  men's 
opportunities  of  serving  God  are  infinitely  various,  it 
was  impossible  for  human  estimates  to  appraise  aright 
the  value  of  each  man's  work ;  hence  hereafter  it  would 
be  found  that  these  estimates  are  often  completely 
reversed  by  God's  verdict :  '  the  first  should  be  last, 
and  the  last  first.'  The  same  lesson  is  enforced  in  aLukexvii. 
passage  preserved  by  St.  Luke.  Jesus  there  points  7~10- 
out  that  a  slave  returning  from  work  in  the  fields  is 
expected  to  wait  upon  his  master  before  refreshing  him- 
self, nor  is  he  thanked  for  doing  that  which  is  his  simple 
duty.  So  men,  when  they  have  carried  out  all  God's 
commands,  have  not  laid  Him  under  any  obligation; 
they  must  still  confess,  'We  are  unprofitable  servants; 
we  have  done  that  which  it  was  our  duty  to  do.' 

When  we  return  to  the  teaching  in  the  Marcan  out-  Teaching 

line,  we  find  that  Jesus,  having  declared  the  blessing  °n  0f" 

0  °  fences, 

which  should  attach  to  the  least  act  of  kindness  done  to  Mark  ix. 

one  of  His  disciples,  added  a  solemn  warning  as  to  the  t?~ft°'   ••• 

heinousness  of  the  guilt  incurred  by  any  one  who  should  6-10. 

put  a  stumbling-block  in  the  way  of  even  the  weakest  ^Ug e  XV11, 

and  humblest  of  His  followers.     It  were  better  for  such 


200    OUTLINES  OF  THE  SYNOPTIC  RECORD 


Mark  ix. 
49. 

Luke  xiv. 
35. 


a  man  to  have  a  millstone  put  about  his  neck  and  be 
drowned  in  the  deep  than  to  be  such  a  cause  of  stum- 
bling to  another.  But,  on  the  other  hand,  the  cause  of 
stumbling  may  come  not  from  without  but  from  within, 
from  some  source  of  temptation  in  a  man's  own  nature. 
In  that  case  a  man  must  be  prepared  to  make  the 
greatest  sacrifice  to  rid  himself  of  the  occasion  of  temp- 
tation. He  must  act  on  the  principle  of  one  who  suffers 
the  loss  of  a  limb  to  save  the  life  of  the  whole  body ; 
so  in  spiritual  things,  too,  he  must  submit  to  any  sever- 
ance, however  painful,  to  preserve  the  spiritual  life  :  it  is 
better  for  him  to  enter  the  Kingdom  of  Heaven  thus 
maimed,  than  while  preserving  all  his  powers  to  be  cast 
into  the  Gehenna  of  fire,  from  which  there  is  no  escape. 
He  then  adds  a  saying,  preserved  to  us  probably  only 
in  a  compressed  form,  which  seems  intended  to  warn 
the  disciples  of  the  responsibility  resting  upon  them  for 
their  influence  on  the  lives  of  others.  Tor  every  one 
shall  be  salted  with  fire.  Salt  is  good :  but  if  the  salt 
have  lost  its  saltness,  wherewith  will  ye  season  it  ? 
Have  salt  in  yourselves,  and  be  at  peace  one  with 
another.'  The  passage  is  one  of  well-known  difficulty. 
The  following  seems  to  be  its  general  drift.  There  is 
a  change  of  metaphor  from  fire,  the  destructive  yet 
purifying  element,  which  purges  out  the  dross  in  a 
man's  nature,  to  salt,  the  health-giving,  preserving  ele- 
ment. Having  spoken  of  the  fires  of  Gehenna,  our 
Lord  shows  that  these  too  have  a  purifying  as  well  as 
a  destructive  purpose.  '  Every  one,'  He  declares,  '  must 
undergo  this  seasoning  by  fire,'  i.e.  must  even  at  the 
cost  of  self-mortification  submit  to  a  process  of  purify- 
ing which  shall  purge  out  the  bad  elements  in  his 
character :  so  only  would  be  preserved  the  salt,  the 
saving  element,  the  good  in  a  man,  which  enables  him 


THE  TRANSFIGURATION  AND  AFTER    201 

to  exercise  a  health-giving  influence  over  others.     This 

salt  the  disciples  must  at  all  costs  preserve  in  themselves. 

If  they  failed  in  this,  if  this  good  element  were  wanting 

in  their  own  lives,  if  they  were  selfish  and  quarrelled  as 

to   precedence,   how   could   they  impart   its   power   to 

others  ?      Their  influence  would   be   ineffective ;    they 

would  become  as  salt  which  has  lost  its  saltness  and  is 

absolutely  worthless.     He  adds  therefore  the  concluding 

words :  '  Have  salt  in  yourselves,  and  be  at  peace  one 

with  another.' 

He  then  goes  on  to  lay  down  the  principles  which  are  Teaching 

to  guide  His   followers   in   dealing  with   one   of    their  °!1  For" 
&  &  giveness. 

number  who  has  fallen.     First  the  one  most  concerned  Matt.xviii. 

is  to  go  alone,  and  in  private  point  out  to  the  offender  JS~?^ke 

his  fault.     If  he  listens  to  his  representations,  the  point  xvii.  3,  4. 

is  gained  ;  the  man  has  thereby  saved  his  brother's  soul. 

If  however  he  refuses  to  listen,  one  or  two  more  are  to 

be   called  in,    that   the   concurrence   of    two   or  three 

witnesses   may   convince   the   man    that   he   is   in   the 

^wrong.     If  this  step  fails,  the  case  is  to  be  referred  to 

the  whole  body  of   the   brotherhood,  the  Church — the 

term  used  for  the  local  Jewish  community.     If  he  still 

refuses  to  submit  to  the  united  judgement  of  the  Church, 

the  most  extreme  course   must   be   taken.      Since   all 

efforts  to  reclaim  him  have  failed,  the  man  must  be 

excommunicate :  '  let  him  be  unto  thee  as  the  Gentile 

and  the  publican.'     Jesus  then  declares  that  this  power 

of  exercising  discipline  over  its  members  should  belong 

to  the  Society  of  His  followers.     Their  united  decisions 

as  to  the  admission  or  exclusion  of  an  offending  brother 

should  indeed  be  ratified  in  heaven.     For  where  even 

two  or  three  of  them  were  agreed,  their  request  would 

be  granted  of  their  Heavenly  Father ;  since  wheresoever 

two  or  three  of  His  followers  were  met  together  in  His 


202    OUTLINES  OF  THE  SYNOPTIC  RECORD 

Name,  to  offer  united  prayers,  there  would  be  Jesus 
Himself  spiritually  present  in  the  midst  of  them  \ 

Thus,  then,  Jesus  had  shown  His  disciples  the  course 
to  adopt  in  order  to  bring  to  repentance  a  brother  who 
had  fallen.  St.  Matthew,  who  relates  the  discourse, 
appends  to  it  a  question  of  Peter,  as  to  how  often  for- 
giveness is  to  be  repeated  by  the  offended  party,  where 
a  brother  has  repented  and  expressed  contrition  for  his 
fault.  In  such  case,  the  Scribes  laid  down  three  times 
as  the  required  number ;  Peter  showed  that  he  was 
willing  to  go  beyond  this  by  suggesting  seven  times. 
Jesus  in  reply  increased  the  number  suggested  by  Peter 
seventyfold,  showing  that  there  was  to  be  no  limit  to 
forgiveness.  Peter's  suggestion  rested  on  a  wrong  prin- 
ciple, as  implying  that  forgiveness  was  to  be  regarded  as 
a  concession  and  not  as  a  duty.  Jesus,  by  the  following 
parable,  showed  them  that  the  true  ground  of  forgive- 
ness towards  the  offences  of  their  fellowmen  was  to  be 
found  in  the  infinite  forgiveness  which  each  one  needed 
Parable  of  from  God.  He  relates  the  case  of  a  servant,  who  having 
cifuTer  received  from  his  lord  complete  remission  of  the  huge 
Servant,  debt  of  ten  thousand  talents  (more  than  .£2,000,000 
sterling  of  our  money),  goes  out  and  seizes  at  once  one 
of  his  fellow  servants,  who  owes  him  the  comparatively 
trifling  amount  of  a  hundred  pence  (about  £4  10s.),  and, 
when  the  man  cannot  make  immediate  payment,  casts 
him  into  prison  ;  thereupon  the  king  revokes  his  pardon 
and  consigns  the  ungrateful  servant  '  to  the  tormentors ' 
till  he  shall  pay  the  full  amount  due.     The  application 

1  The  saying  may  be  illustrated  by  a  Rabbinic  comment  on 
Mai.  iii.  11,  that,  when  two  are  together  and  occupy  themselves 
with  the  law,  the  Shekhinah  (the  Jewish  term  for  the  Divine 
Presence  or  Manifestation)  is  between  them.  Cf.  Edersheim,  Life 
of  Jesus,  vol.  ii.  p.  124  note. 


THE  TRANSFIGURATION  AND  AFTER    203 

of  the  parable  was  clear  enough.  Jesus  sums  up  its 
lesson  in  the  words  :  '  So  shall  also  My  heavenly  Father 
do  unto  you,  if  ye  forgive  not  every  one  his  brother  from 
your  heart.' 


ADDITIONAL  NOTE  TO  CHAPTER  XII. 

ST.  LUKE'S  GREAT  INSERTION. 

At  this  point  we  are  met  by  a  large  section  of 
St.  Luke's  Gospel,  extending  over  nine  chapters  (ix.  51- 
xviii.  14),  peculiar  to  that  Evangelist.  Throughout  this 
portion  of  his  Gospel,  commonly  known  as  '  the  great 
Insertion,'  he  departs  from  the  Marcan  outline,  and,  at 
the  close,  resumes  it  again  almost  at  the  point  where 
he  left  it,  a  few  intervening  verses  only  of  St.  Mark 
being  omitted  (Luke  ix.  50  =  Mark  ix.  40 ;  Luke  xviii. 
15  =  Mark  x.  13).  Thus,  as  the  narrative  stands,  the 
Evangelist  appears  to  connect  with  the  journey  to 
Jerusalem  a  somewhat  extended  period  of  activity  on 
the  part  of  Jesus.  This  has  led  harmonists  to  suggest 
that  St.  Luke  intends,  in  these  chapters,  to  record  a 
'  ministry  in  Samaria  and  Peraea,'  which  is  omitted  by 
the  other  Gospels.  A  closer  examination,  however,  of 
the  contents  entirely  fails  to  bear  out  such  a  view.  The 
insertion  of  the  section  at  this  point  tends  to  interrupt 
the  historical  development,  as  it  appears  from  the 
Marcan  outline  ;  further,  the  notes  of  time  and  place, 
which  introduce  the  various  narratives  contained  in  the 
section,  are,  for  the  most  part,  quite  vague  and  indefi- 
nite. The  facts  are  best  explained  if  we  suppose  that 
the  Evangelist  has  grouped  together  in  this  portion 
of  his  Gospel  a  quantity  of  matter,  which  He  found  in 
his  sources  prefaced  by  no  definite  notes  of  chronology, 
and  not  attached  more  naturally  to  any  other  point 
of  the  Marcan  outline.  Much  of  this  matter  has  been 
already  treated  in  what  appeared  to  be  a  suitable  con- 


204    OUTLINES  OF  THE  SYNOPTIC  RECORD 

nexion.  Some  of  the  remaining  narratives  are  referred 
to  in  the  following  chapters,  though  it  is  of  course 
impossible  to  determine  their  historical  position.  It 
seems  probable  that  for  much  of  the  matter  contained 
in  this  portion  of  his  narrative  St.  Luke  had  access  to 
some  special  source  or  sources,  not  used  by  the  two 
other  Evangelists. 


CHAPTER   XIII 
THE  LAST  JOURNEY  TO  JERUSALEM 

Pharisees'  Question  on  Divorce. — Blessing  of  Children.— In- 
cident of  Young  Ruler.— Teaching  on  Wealth.  —  Parables 
of  Unrighteous  Steward,  and  of  Rich  Man  and  Lazarus. — 
Request  of  Sons  of  Zebedee.— Bartirnaeus.— Bethany.— The 
Anointing. — Treachery  of  Judas. 

Maek  x,  xiv.  3-11;  Matthew  xix,  xx.  17-34,  xxvi. 
6-13 ;  Luke  x.  38-42,  xvi.  1-12,  19-31,  xviii.  15- 
43,  xxii.  3-6  ;  John  xi,  xii.  1-11. 

The  public  ministry  in  Galilee  had,  as  we  have  seen,  The  Final 
been  already  brought  to  a  close ;  Jesus  now  takes  His  jP^rture 
final  departure  from  the  district  which  had  been  the  Galilee. 
principal  scene  of  His  activity.  From  this  time  forward,  ^*jj  ^" 
as   we   mark   the   forces   of   opposition  from   different  1,  2. 
quarters  gathering  round  Him,  it  becomes  clear  that 
the  final  catastrophe  cannot   be  long  delayed.     While 
His  nearest   followers,  indeed,   remained  utterly  blind 
to  the  true  situation,  He  Himself  was  in  no  doubt  as  to 
the  certainty  of  the  fate,  whose  very  circumstances  He 
already  distinctly  forecasts. 

At    this    point    is    related    another   attempt   of    the  Question 
Pharisees  to  ensnare  Jesus.     In  this  case  their  question  onDi- 
had  reference  to  His  attitude  to  the  law  of  marriage :  ^J^k  x 
'  Is  it  lawful,'  they  asked,  '  for  a  man  to  put  away  his  2-12. 
wife?'     Their  object,  probably,  was  to  convict  Jesus,  ^j}2  * 


206     OUTLINES  OF  THE  SYNOPTIC  RECORD 

whose  stricter  standard  on  the  subject  was  known  to 
them,  of  teaching  in  violation  of  the  Mosaic  law.  Our 
Lord  replied  that  Moses'  permission  of  divorce  in  such 
case  was  only  a  concession  to  their  hardness  of  heart ; 
it  could  not  cancel  the  underlying  principle  of  marriage 
set  forth  once  for  all  by  Divine  laws  at  the  ideal 
beginning  of  human  society l ;  thereby,  He  declared, 
the  two  became  '  no  more  twain,  but  one  flesh.'  Subse- 
quently, in  private  conversation  with  His  disciples,  who 
asked  for  further  explanation  of  the  saying,  Jesus 
pointed  out  that  the  ideal  of  marriage  forbade  divorce ; 
though  He  adds,  according  to  St.  Matthew,  'except 
for  fornication.'  Even  this  qualification  is  wanting  in 
St.  Mark.  And  hence,  He  declares,  since  the  marriage 
tie  was  indissoluble,  the  remarriage  of  either  party  was 
necessarily  adulterous.  When  the  disciples  suggested 
that  on  such  a  view  it  were  better  not  to  incur  the 
obligation  of  marriage  at  all,  Jesus  replied  that  there 
were  some  men  who  were  from  their  birth  naturally 
unfitted  for  the  marriage  state ;  while  others  cut  them- 
selves off  from  it  in  order  that  they  might  devote 
themselves  to  God's  service  free  from  distraction.  Con- 
scious of  the  advance  which  such  teaching  implied  on 
all  existing  standards  of  purity,  He  adds :  '  He  that  is 
able  to  receive  it,  let  him  receive  it.' 
The  All  three  Gospels   next  describe  a   scene   singularly 

^fthe118  characteristic  of  the  spirit  and  teaching  of  Jesus.  Once 
children,  before  He  had  held  up  to  His  disciples  a  little  child  as 
13*16  ^  ^ne  Patkern  of  true  humility.  On  one  occasion  some 
Matt,  xix.  little  children  were  brought  to  Him  that  He  might  bless 
i3^15'.  ...  them  by  laying  His  hands  upon  them;  His  disciples, 
15-17.  with  strange  misapprehension  of  their  Master's  spirit, 
tried  to  prevent  this.  Our  Lord,  moved  to  indignation 
1  Cf.  Hort's  Judaistic  Christianity,  p.  33. 


THE  LAST  JOURNEY  TO  JERUSALEM    207 

at  their  conduct,  called  the  little  ones  to  Him,  took 
them  up  in  His  arms,  and  blessed  them,  declaring  that, 
so  far  from  children  being  excluded  from  the  blessings 
of  God's  Kingdom,  the  child  temper  of  innocence,  trust, 
and  teachableness  was  the  surest  passport  for  admission 
to  it. 

Then  follows  an  incident  related  in  some  detail  in  all  Incident 
three  Gospels.    A  young  man  of  great  wealth,  a  ruler  of  young1 
the  synagogue,  came  to  Jesus,  asking  Him,  '  Good  Master,  Ruler, 
what  shall  I  do  that  I  may  inherit  eternal  life  ? '     This  \f*22  * 
request  for  guidance  from  one  in  such  a  position,  toge-  Matt,  xix. 
ther  with  the  evident  deference  of  his  attitude  towards  Lukexviii. 
Jesus,    shows   that    the   impression    produced    by   His  18-23. 
ministry  was   not  limited   to   the  humbler   classes   of 
society.     Clearly  this   man  at  any  rate  was   conscious 
that,  though  his  life  satisfied  the  religious  standard  of 
his  fellows,  it  came  short  of  that  demanded  by  the  new 
Teacher.     Jesus   first    took   exception    to   the   epithet 
'good,'  asking,  'Why  callest  thou  Me  good?     None  is 
good  save  one,  even  God.'      These  words  have  caused 
some  quite  needless  controversy.     They  clearly  have  no 
bearing  on  the  sinlessness  of  the  human  nature  of  our 
Lord,  though  it  would  seem  that  the  difficulty  which 
the  words  were  thought  to  present  to  the  early  Chris- 
tians led  to  the  altered  form  given  to  the  question  in 
St.   Matthew:    'Why  askest   thou  Me  concerning  that 
which  is  good  ? '     Jesus  merely  intended  to  show  that 
the  title  '  Good  Master '  implied  on  the  questioner's  part 
an  imperfect  standard  of  moral  goodness,  since  absolute 
goodness  belonged  to  God  alone  and  not  to  any  human 
teacher — and  as  such  he  obviously  regarded  Jesus.    Our 
Lord  then  pointed  him  to  the  Commandments  of  the 
Second  Table  for  a  statement  of  the  active  duties  which 
God  required  of  men ;  the  man  replied  to  this  without 


208     OUTLINES  OF  THE  SYNOPTIC  RECORD 

hesitation  :  '  All  these  things  have  I  observed  from  my 
youth.'  Jesus  was  so  impressed  by  the  evident  sincerity 
of  the  inquirer  that  '  looking  upon  him  He  loved  him,' 
and  seeing  in  him  the  temper  of  whole-hearted  zeal 
which  He  always  sought  in  men,  He  would  have  added 
him  to  the  number  of  His  permanent  followers.  He 
therefore  put  to  him  the  decisive  test  which  should 
prove  whether  he  really  had  the  entire  devotion  to  God 
and  his  fellow  men  which  he  professed,  telling  him,  '  One 
thing  thou  lackest :  go,  sell  whatsoever  thou  hast,  and 
give  to  the  poor,  and  thou  shalt  have  treasure  in 
heaven  :  and  come,  follow  Me.'  The  sacrifice  demanded 
proved  too  heavy ;  the  man's  face  fell,  and  he  turned 
away  sorrowful,  'for  he  was  one  that  had  great  pos- 
sessions.' 
Teaching  Jesus  pointed  the  bystanders  to  the  failure  of  one 
M^Xealtl1'  m  au  other  respects  so  whole-hearted,  as  a  proof  how 
23-31.  hard  it  was  for  those  possessed  of  riches  to  enter  the 
Sftjn™'  Kingdom,  declaring  it  to  be  easier  for  a  camel  to  go 
Lukexviii.  through  a  needle's  eye  than  for  a  rich  man  to  enter  into 
24-30.  fae  Kingdom  of  God.  The  saying  was  probably  a  pro- 
verbial one ;  in  any  case  an  impressive  paradox  of  this 
kind  is  quite  in  character  with  our  Lord's  common 
method  of  teaching ;  yet  this,  as  other  like  expressions,  has 
proved  a  stumbling-block  to  prosaic  and  literal-minded 
critics,  who  have  expended  their  ingenuity  in  explaining 
the  camel  as  a  kind  of  cable,  or  the  needle's  eye  as 
a  narrow  gateway  for  foot-passengers.  In  reply  to  the 
astonishment  aroused  in  His  disciples  by  the  warning, 
Jesus  added  that,  though  humanly  it  was  impossible, 
*  with  God  all  things  are  possible.' 

The  incident,  and  the  lessons  which  He  drew  from  it, 
serve  well  to  illustrate  our  Lord's  general  attitude  to 
wealth.    There  is  no  doubt  much  in  His  teaching,  as 


THE  LAST  JOURNEY  TO  JERUSALEM    209 

preserved  to  us,  which  appears  to  condemn  the  posses- 
sion of  riches  as  in  itself  evil.  This  is  specially  notice- 
able in  St.  Luke's  Gospel,  in  whose  version  of  the  Sermon 
on  the  Mount  the  poor  appear  to  be  blessed  because 
they  are  poor,  the  rich  to  be  denounced  because  they 
are  rich.  We  have  already  dealt  with  the  interpretation 
of  the  Beatitudes  and  Woes  in  St.  Luke ;  yet  when  we 
consider  our  Lord's  teaching  as  a  whole,  it  is  clear  that 
although  He  passes  no  absolute  condemnation  on  riches 
in  themselves,  at  the  same  time  He  recognized  that 
their  possession  involved  peculiar  spiritual  danger,  as 
rendering  specially  difficult  that  single-minded  devotion 
to  God  and  detachment  from  worldly  aims  which  He 
always  declared  to  be  essential  for  those  who  would 
enter  the  Kingdom  of  God.  His  disciples  must  have 
their  treasure  laid  up  in  heaven,  where  their  true  hopes 
and  interests  should  be.  Jesus  constantly  taught  that 
earthly  wealth  was  to  be  regarded  as  a  trust  to  be 
employed  in  God's  service,  and  that  for  the  use  made 
of  it  a  man  would  hereafter  be  held  accountable. 

This   is    shown   in    the    parable  of   the  Unrighteous  Cf.  Parable 
Steward,   to  which   reference  has   already  been  made,  righteous" 
In  that  parable,  so  far  from  condemning  riches  abso-  Steward. 
lutely,  Jesus  taught  that  a  man's  future  hereafter  de-  1_12. 
pends  on  the  use  which  he  makes  of  worldly  possessions 
here.     The  steward  in  the  parable,  cynical  and  unprin- 
cipled as  he  showed  himself,  nevertheless  earned  com- 
mendation from  his  master  for  his  astuteness  and  fore- 
sight, since  by  making  his  lord's  tenants  accomplices 
to  his  own  fraud,  he  ensured  for  himself,  after  his  expul- 
sion from  office,  a  welcome  to  their  homes.     Our  Lord 
deduces  from  the  story  the  inference  that  '  the  sous  of 
this  world'  commonly  show,  as  in  this  instance,  more 
wisdom   and   foresight  in   their  worldly  dealings  with 


510    OUTLINES  OF  THE  SYNOPTIC  RECORD 

their  own  generation,  than  '  the  sons  of  light '  in  their 
conduct  as  to  things  eternal.     He  therefore  draws  from 
the  parable  two  lessons  :    (i)  His  followers  are  so  to  use 
the  material  wealth  and  advantages  which  they  enjoy 
on  earth,  '  the  mammon  of  unrighteousness,'  in  securing 
for   themselves   friends    and  a  home,  that    when   this 
earthly  wealth  fails,  as  fail  it  will,  they  may  find  a  wel- 
come into  '  the  eternal  tabernacles,'  that  heavenly  home 
which  they  have  thus  prepared  for  themselves,    (ii)  They 
are  always  to  remember  that  they  are  but  stewards  of 
earthly  possessions ;    that  riches  are  a  trust  committed 
to  them  by  God  to  test  their  fidelity;    hence  only  the 
man  who  has  thus  proved  faithful  in  a  very  little  would 
be   faithful    also   in   much.      If   they  had   not   proved 
faithful  here  in  their  use  of  'that  which  is  another's,' 
i.  e.  God's,  they  could  not  hereafter  be  entrusted  with 
the  true  riches. 
Parable  of      This  principle,  that  the  position  of  men  beyond  the 
Man  and    grave  would  depend  on  the  use  made  during  this  life 
Lazarus,     of   earthly  advantages,   is   further   drawn   out   in   the 
19-31XV1    parable  of  the  Rich  Man  and  the  Beggar,  also  preserved 
in  St.  Luke's  Gospel.     The  details  of  the  story,  drawing 
out  the  contrast  of  the  condition  before  and  after  death, 
are  too  familiar  to  need  repetition.     Clearly  it  was  not 
the  intention  of  Jesus  in  this  parable  to  enlighten  men's 
curiosity  by  a  description  of  the  conditions  of  a  future 
life.     He  adopts,  for  His  purpose,  the  current  Jewish 
ideas  on  the  subject.     The  picture  of  the  scene  after 
death  appears  to  be  based  on  the  conception,  which  pre- 
vailed later  in  Jewish  belief,  of   two  divisions  in  the 
intermediate  state,  one  of   bliss  for  the  righteous  and 
Cf.  Hast-    one  of  torment  for  the  wicked.     Thus  Lazarus  is  carried 
ings'^.D.,  by  angels  to  'Abraham's  bosom' — an  expression  which 
p.  18.  is  clearly  here  used  as  practically  equivalent  to  Paradise. 


THE  LAST  JOURNEY  TO  JERUSALEM    211 

The  term,  though  not  common  in  Jewish  writings,  is 
found  in  Rabbinical  literature  of  the  second  and  third 
century,  standing  for  the  place  of  highest  honour  next 
to  the  Father  of  the  Faithful,  assigned  to  the  pious 
departed.  It  is  here  represented  as  divided  by  an 
impassable  gulf  from  the  place  where  the  rich  man  lies 
■  in  Hades,  in  torments.'  Some  have  thought  that,  since 
this  conception  of  a  division  between  the  righteous  and 
the  wicked  in  the  intermediate  state  is  not  found  in 
Jewish  writings  as  early  as  our  Lord's  time,  the  imagery 
of  the  story  points  rather  to  the  final  state  of  the 
righteous  and  the  wicked  after  death.  The  question, 
however,  whether  Jesus  meant  to  represent  the  state 
described  as  final  or  temporary  is  beside  the  point,  and 
has  no  bearing  on  the  central  lesson  of  the  parable, 
which  is  plain  enough ;  for  what  Jesus  really  intended 
to  teach  by  this  parable  was,  that  the  condition  of  men 
after  death  may  be  widely  different  from  that  hi  this 
life.  We  notice  that  the  rich  man  in  the  parable  makes 
no  attempt  to  dispute  the  justice  of  his  sentence.  In 
short,  Jesus  declares  that  a  man  cannot  live  for  self 
here,  and  yet  enjoy  God's  presence  hereafter.  The 
parable  concludes  by  showing  that  this  should  have 
been  plain  enough  to  the  hearers  of  Jesus  from  the 
revelation  of  God,  to  whicli  they  already  had  access. 
In  reply  to  the  rich  man's  appeal  that  Lazarus  might 
be  sent  to  warn  his  brethren,  lest  they  too,  by  continu- 
ing in  a  life  of  selfishness,  should  hereafter  share  his  own 
fate,  he  was  told  that  they  had  warning  enough  in  the 
Scriptures,  '  Moses  and  the  prophets ' ;  and  if  these 
failed  to  move  them  to  repentance,  they  would  not  be 
convinced  by  any  miraculous  appearance  of  one  risen 
from  the  dead.  It  is  possible  that  this  parable  formed 
a  pair  with  that  of  the  Unrighteous  Steward,  both  dealing 

P2 


212    OUTLINES  OF  THE  SYNOPTIC  RECORD 

with    the    right    use    of    riches   with   a   view    to    the 
future. 
The  Jesus  had,   as  we  have   seen,   set   out   on   this   last 

Approach   journev  to  Jerusalem,   knowing  the  fate  which   there 
Crisis1.      awaited   Him.      The   bitter   hostility   of    the   religious 
leaders,  the  fickleness  of  the  multitude  which  was  shown 
in  the  ebb  and  flow  of  popular  enthusiasm,  the  absolute 
failure  of  the  nation  at  large  to  accept  His  Messianic 
ideal,  the  want  of  true  sympathy  with  His  purposes  in 
those  who   had  espoused  His  cause,  all   foreshadowed 
plainly  the  final  issue.     But  Jesus  Himself  saw  further 
than  any  human  observer.     He  alone  recognized  that 
the  teaching  of  Scripture  and  the  fate  of  all  the  prophets 
of  the  nation  down  to  the  Baptist  pointed  to  the  same 
conclusion,  and  showed  that  the  Messiah  must  suffer ; 
and  He  realized  that  only  in  submission  to  this  fate  lay 
Mark  x.  32.  the  fulfilment  of  His  Father's  Will.     The  consciousness 
of  this  lent  to  this  last  progress  to  Jerusalem  a  certain 
mysterious  dignity  which  clearly  impressed  the  beholders, 
and  has  left  its  mark  on  the  narrative.     Jesus  Himself 
went  in  front  of  the  company,  followed  by  His  disciples, 
who,  oppressed  with  the  sense  of  alienation  from  their 
Master  and  the  dread  of   some  great  trial  which  lay 
before  Him,  'were  amazed,1  while  others  who  accom- 
panied Him  were  possessed  by  a  vague  sense  of  awe. 
Further         Now,   for    the   third    time,   Jesus    repeated    to    His 
Teaching    disciples  the  prediction  of  the  fate  in  store  for  the  Son 
ings.  of  Man,  on  this  occasion  with  fresh  details  as  to  the 

S2%4X  Par^  *'°  ^e  P^ayed  m  His  death  by  the  Gentiles,  and  the 
Matt.  xx.  insults  and  scourging  which  should  accompany  it,  yet 
l'~,19'   ...  adding,  as  always,  the  assurance  that  after  three  days 

Lukexvm.  &  J  J 

31-34.        He  should  rise  again. 

1  Cf.  Sanday  in  Hastings1  B.D.,  vol.  ii.  p.  631. 


THE  LAST  JOURNEY  TO  JERUSALEM    213 

An  incident  which  occurred  at  this  point  shows  more  Request 
forcibly  than  any  description  how  entirely  those  nearest  gonseof 
to  Him  had  failed  to  grasp  His  meaning.     James  and  Zebedee. 
John,  the  two  sons  of  Zebedee,  accompanied  by  their  35^45 x* 
mother  Salome,  came  to  Jesus  with  a  request  that  in  Matt,  xx. 
His  Kingdom  they  might  occupy  the  places  nearest  to  cf 
Him.      The    petition    rested    on   the    conception   of    a  Luke  xxii. 
worldly  kingdom  to  be  established  upon  earth,  suggested  ~4z~2(% 
probably  by  a  literal  interpretation  of  His  recent  promise 
that  His  apostles  should  sit  on  twelve  thrones,  judging 
the  twelve  tribes.     The  request,  however  blameworthy 
was   the   personal   ambition   which   prompted   it,   yet, 
being  presented  at  such  a  time,  gave  proof  at  least  of 
a  striking  confidence  in  the  final  triumph  of  their  Master's 
cause.     Hence  Jesus  did  not  directly  rebuke  their  self- 
seeking,  but  pointed  them  to  the  true  meaning  of  such 
a  privilege  as  they  sought.    He  asked  them  if  they  were 
prepared   to   share   the   cup   of   pain   and   baptism   of 
suffering  which  nearness  to  Him   involved.     On  their 
prompt  assent   to  these   conditions  He   declared   that 
these  indeed  should  be  granted  them;    but  the  places 
nearest  to  Him  in  His  Kingdom  were  not  to  be  assigned 
by  any  act  of  royal  favour,  but  should  be  only  for  those 
'  for  whom  it  hath  been  prepared,'  that  is,  as  He  shows 
in  the  discourse  which  follows,  who  have  proved  them- 
selves fit  for  such  a  position  by  likeness  to  the  spirit  of 
their  Master.      The   request    not    unnaturally   aroused 
murmurs  of   jealousy  among  the  ten  against  the  two 
ambitious  disciples ;  indeed,  we  notice  throughout  this 
closing   period  of  the  ministry  the   frequent   signs   of 
mutual  rivalry  in  the  Apostolic  band,  standing  out  in 
marked  contrast   to  their  Master's  spirit.     Jesus  once 
more  called  them  to  Him  and  rebuked  a  temper  which 
betrayed  so  complete  a  failure  to  grasp  His  own  ideals. 


214    OUTLINES  OF  THE  SYNOPTIC  RECORD 

Again  He  pointed  them  to  the  spirit  of  unselfish  service 
as  the  true  measure  of  greatness  for  His  followers.  The 
greatest  among  them  should  be  the  minister  and  slave 
of  all.  That  spirit  of  service  found  its  highest  example 
in  the  life  of  the  Son  of  Man,  culminating  in  His  death 
for  others :  '  For  verily  the  Son  of  Man  came  not  to  be 
ministered  unto,  but  to  minister,  and  to  give  His  life 
a  ransom  for  many.' 
Passing  Proceeding    on    His    journey   Jesus   passed   through 

through      Jericho.     At  that  place  St.  Luke  records  the  incident 

Jericho.  x 

Zacchaeus.  of  the  visit  to  the  house  of  Zacchaeus.     The  story  of 
l"ioe  X1X    ms  conversi°n  connects  itself  most  naturally  with  the 

'Publican  Ministry1.' 
Healing  It  would  seem  that  from  this  time  forward  the  crowds 

maeus*1"     °^  Pugrmis  accompanying  Jesus  on  His  way  continued 
Mark  x.      to   increase,    and   His   journey  to   Jerusalem   assumed 
Matt  xx     more  and  more  the  appearance  of  a  triumphal  progress. 
29-34,         The  enthusiasm  of  the  multitude  was  still  further  excited 
27-31         as  ^e  ^e^  Jericho  by  the  healing  of  the  blind  beggar 
Lukexviii.  Bartimaeus.     Considerable  variations  as  to  the  circum- 
stances of   this   miracle  seem  to   have  existed  in  the 
Gospel  tradition.     St.  Matthew  mentions  two  blind  men, 
possibly  by  confusion  with  a  similar  miracle  which  he 
has    already    related :    however,    the    vivid    details   of 
St.  Mark's  account  of  the  incident  clearly  betoken  the 
recollections  of   an  eyewitness.     It   is   significant   that 
this  blind  beggar  addresses  Jesus  by  the  Messianic  title 
'  Thou  Son  of  David,'  thus  striking  the  first  note  of  that 
public  welcome  accorded  Him  later  by  the  crowds  of 
pilgrims  at  the  Triumphal  Entry. 
Raising  In   order   to   understand    the   subsequent   course   of 

rus  &<?      events  the  Synoptic  narrative  needs  to  be  supplemented 

John  xi.     by  the  additional  information  given  in  the  Fourth  Gospel. 
1-57. 

See  p.  108. 


THE  LAST  JOURNEY  TO  JERUSALEM    215 

It  would  be  hardly  credible  that  the  conspiracy  against 
Jesus  should  so  rapidly  have  come  to  a  head,  if  He  had 
only  appeared  in  Jerusalem  for  the  first  time  a  few  days 
previously.  St.  John,  however,  mentions  recent  sojourns 
in  the  capital  for  the  Feasts  of  Tabernacles  and  Dedica- 
tion (John  vii.  2,  x.  22),  and  just  at  this  point  in 
the  narrative  he  relates  the  miracle  of  the  raising  of 
Lazarus,  implying  that  it  was  the  sickness  and  death 
of  His  friend  which  led  Jesus  to  visit  Judaea.  The 
effect  produced  by  this  act  gave  once  more  a  new 
stimulus  to  the  expectations  and  enthusiasm  of  the 
populace,  and  the  determination  of  the  ruling  classes  at 
all  costs  to  make  away  with  Jesus.  From  this  time  the 
lead  is  taken  by  the  Chief  Priests,  who  belonged  mainly 
to  the  Sadducaic  party.  They '  thenceforward  were 
steadily  bent  on  compassing  the  destruction  of  One,  the 
success  of  whose  claims  would  be  fatal  to  their  own 
power.  The  treachery  of  Judas  soon  gave  them  an 
unlooked-for  opportunity  of  putting  their  scheme  into 
execution,  without  risking  the  danger  of  a  popular 
tumult. 

Jesus  before  entering  Jerusalem  took  up  His  abode  at  The 
Bethany,  the  home  of   Lazarus  and  his  sisters ;    their  jnCT  at 
house   had  probably  been   on   previous  occasions  His  Bethany. 
head  quarters  during  His  visits  to  the  city.  3  9 

St.  Luke,  who  omits  the  following  narrative,  probably  Matt.xxv 
because  he  had  previously  related  the  somewhat  similar  q^ 
act  of  anointing  in  the  house  of  Simon  the  leper,  has  Luke  vii- 
preserved  from  one  of  his   sources   an   incident  which  j0hn  xn 
occurred  at  one  of  the  stays  of  Jesus  with  the  house-  !-8- 
hold  at  Bethany,  and  which  throws  light  on  the  con-  "j^tm 
trast   of   the   characters   of   the   two  sisters.     Martha,  Home  at 
busily  occupied  in  making  preparations  for  the  reception  jJuk/x* 
of  her  guest,  complained  to  Jesus  that  Mary  was  content  38-42. 


216     OUTLINES  OF  THE  SYNOPTIC  RECORD 

to  sit  at  His  feet  to  hear  His  teaching,  and  gave  her  no 
assistance.  Jesus  in  reply  gently  rebuked  her  for  her 
excessive  anxiety,  declaring  that  He  needed  no  such 
elaborate  preparations,  a  few  things  or  one  alone  would 
suffice ;  and  Mary  in  her  eagerness  to  learn  of  Jesus  had 
indeed  chosen  '  the  good  part,  which  should  not  be  taken 
from  her.' 

It  appears  from  St.  John,  who  tacitly  corrects  the 
Marcan  narrative  on  this  point,  that  Jesus  reached 
the  home  at  Bethany  six  days  before  the  Passover,  on 
the  Friday  evening,  that  is  to  say,  at  the  opening 
of  the  Sabbath.  There  He  was  entertained  at  a  feast  in 
the  house  of  Simon  the  leper,  whose  relationship  to  the 
family  at  Bethany  we  are  not  told.  On  this  occasion 
Mary  gave  a  further  proof  of  her  devotion  and  gratitude 
to  Jesus.  Taking  a  pound  of  the  most  costly  spikenard 
she  poured  it  over  His  head  (Mark)  or  feet  (John) — for  on 
this  detail  the  accounts  differ.  So  costly  an  offering  did 
not  pass  without  remonstrance  from  some  present,  who 
complained  that  the  price  of  the  ointment  might  have 
been  better  employed  in  being  devoted  to  the  poor. 
St.  John  traces  this  feigned  philanthropic  zeal  to  Judas 
Iscariot,  who  kept  the  common  fund  of  the  little  com- 
pany, from  which  such  contributions  to  the  poor  would 
be  made,  and  was  in  the  habit  of  pilfering  the  contents. 
Jesus  rebuked  the  murmurers,  reminding  them  that 
while  they  had  the  poor  always  with  them,  He  would 
not  be  with  them  for  ever.  He  then  further  hinted  at 
His  approaching  death  by  saying  that  this  anointing 
was  an  embalmment  beforehand  for  His  burial,  and  that 
wherever  the  Gospel  was  preached  this  act  of  love  should 
be  recorded.  Such  an  incidental  utterance  betrays  in 
a  striking  way  how  constantly  His  mind  was  at  this 
time  dwelling  on  the  prospect  of  His  death. 


THE  LAST  JOURNEY  TO  JERUSALEM    217 

Immediately  after  the  incident  of  the  anointing,  our  Treachery 
narratives  place  the  visit  of  Judas  to  the  Chief  Priests  ?;    ,     s> 

r  Mark  xiv. 

to  make  overtures  for  the  betrayal  of  his  Master.    Possi-  10, 11. 
blv  the  rebuke  which  had  been  addressed  to  him  on  Matt-xxvl- 
that  occasion,  or  the  consciousness  that  his  treachery  Lukexxii. 
had   been   discerned   by  Jesus,   or  else  despair  at   the  3~6' 
repeated  allusions  to  his  Master's  impending  fate,  has- 
tened Judas  in  his  decision.     He  agreed  with  the  Chief 
Priests,  for  the  sum  of  thirty  shekels ',  to  betray  Jesus 
to   them   on   the   first    convenient   opportunity   which 
should  present  itself. 

Thus,  then,  with  the  approach  of  the  Passover  the 
plots  of  the  enemies  of  Jesus  were  matured,  and  all 
things  were  already  in  train  for  the  final  catastrophe. 

1  The  pieces  of  money  were  probably  staters  (R.  V.  shekels)  or 
four-drachma  pieces,  of  Phoenician  coinage,  thirty  of  which  would 
be  about  equivalent  to  £4  16.9.  of  our  money. 


CHAPTER   XIV 

THE   LAST   WEEK  OF  THE   MINISTRY 

The  Triumphal  Entry.— Cursing  of  the  Fig-tree.  — Question  of 
Pharisees  and  Herodians.-  Question  of  Sadducees.— Ques- 
tion of  Scribe.— Parable  of  Good  Samaritan.—  Anti-Pharisaic 
Teachings.— Parable  of  Wicked  Husbandmen.— Question  of 
Jesus  as  to  Messiah.—  Incident  as  to  Widow's  Mites. 

Mark  xi.  1-14,  20-25,  xii.  1-44;  Matthew  xxi.  1-11, 
18-22,  33-46,  xxii.  15-46,  xxiii.  1-39;  Luke  xix. 
28  44,  xx.  9-47,  xxi.  1-4,  x.  25-37,  xi.  39-52; 
John  xii.  12-19. 

Beginning      We  enter  now  upon  the  last  act  of  the  drama.     The 

Last  Act     narrative  of  all  the  Evangelists  becomes  fuller  and  more 

Hastings'    detailed  as  the  final  catastrophe  approaches.     Professor 

B •  ■D.».         Sanday  has  clearly  analysed  the  motives  which  actuated 

p.  632.        the  different  actors  in  the  plot ;  and  in  the  light  of  these 

it  is  possible  to  trace  out  with  comparative  certainty 

the  progress  of  events.     We  see  how  the  varied  forces 

at  work  were  all  tending  more  and  more  decisively  to 

the  same  issue. 

Knowing  that  the  end  was  near,  Jesus  at  last  threw 
Entry  off  the  reserve  which  He  had  thus  far  maintained. 
salem6™  Hitherto  He  had  thwarted  all  attempts  at  a  Messianic 
Mark  xi.  demonstration  in  His  favour ;  but  now  by  His  tri- 
Matt  xxi  umPnal  entry  into  Jerusalem  He  makes  His  last  and 
l-il.  only   public   claim    to    Messiahship.      On   approaching 


The  Tri- 
umphal 


THE  LAST  WEEK  OF  THE  MINISTRY     219 

the  city  He  sent  two  of  His  disciples  to  the  neigh-  Luke  xix. 
bouring  village— doubtless  Bethany — with  directions  to  Cf 
bring  an  ass's  colt  which  they  should  find  tied  there;  John  xii 
to  any  objections  raised  by  the  owner,  they  were  to 
answer  by  declaring  that  '  the  Lord '  needed  him,  and 
would  immediately,  after  using  him,  restore  him  again. 
This  they  did,  and  brought  the  colt  to  Jesus.  The 
owner  would  appear  to  have  been  a  disciple,  who  was 
willing,  on  the  assurance  given,  to  place  his  foal  at  the 
disposal  of  Jesus ;  there  seems  no  necessity  to  suppose 
any  miraculous  foreknowledge  on  the  part  of  Jesus  in 
regard  to  the  incident1.  Mounting  the  ass's  foal,  Jesus 
rode  from  Bethany  to  Jerusalem  over  the  Mount  of 
Olives,  surrounded  by  crowds,  who  were  probably  com- 
posed in  the  main  of  pilgrims  from  Galilee  journeying 
to  the  feast.  These,  as  He  advanced,  strewed  their 
garments  and  branches  cut  down  from  the  neighbouring 
palm-trees  in  His  path,  and  in  the  words  of  the  great 
Hallelujah  Psalm  (Ps.  cxviii)  acclaimed  Him  with  cries 
of  welcome,  which  could  only  have  a  Messianic  import : 
'  Hosanna ;  Blessed  is  He  that  cometh  in  the  name  of 
the  Lord :  Blessed  is  the  kingdom  that  cometh,  the 
kingdom  of  our  father  David  :  Hosanna  in  the  highest.' 

As  the  procession  approached  the  city  fresh  crowds  Eepulse 
streamed  out  to  meet  it.     Jesus,  on  this  occasion,  made  Qbjecetion 
no  attempt  to  check  the  acclamations  of  the  multitudes,  of  the 
and  even  when  the  Pharisees  urged  Him  to  silence  their  £uke  xlx*' 
cries,  refused  to  do  so,  declaring  that  now,  if  they  were  39,  40. 
silent,  the  very  stones  would  cry  out. 

1  St.  Matthew's  mention  of  an  ass  and  foal  is  apparently  due  to 
a  desire  on  his  part  to  find  a  literal  fulfilment  of  the  prophecy  of 
Zechariah,  referred  to  in  the  First  and  Fourth  Gospels  :  '  Tell  ye  the  Zech.  ix.  9. 
daughter  of  Zion,  Behold,  thy  King  cometh  unto  thee,  meek  and 
riding  upon  an  ass,  and  upon  a  colt,  the  foal  of  an  ass.' 


220    OUTLINES  OF  THE  SYNOPTIC  RECORD 

The  meaning  of  His  attitude  was  unmistakable.  He 
had  deliberately  accepted  the  people's  homage,  and 
thus  allowed  Himself  to  be  recognized  as  Messiah.  The 
effect  of  this  act,  alike  on  the  hierarchy  and  the  populace, 
must  have  been  overwhelming.  The  hierarchy  had  been 
plotting  to  take  Him  by  stealth,  only  afraid  that  He 
might  elude  their  vigilance,  when  news  was  brought 
that  He  had  thus  openly  defied  them  and  proclaimed 
Himself  as  the  popular  Deliverer.  Thenceforward  they 
recognized  more  forcibly  than  ever  how  urgent  it  was 
to  remove  such  a  menace  to  their  authority.  So,  too, 
the  hopes  of  His  adherents  revived  for  a  moment. 
Now,  at  last,  in  the  Holy  City,  amid  the  crowds  assem- 
bled for  the  feast,  He  would  surely  take  the  step  which 
He  had  refused  to  take  at  a  former  Passover  in  Galilee 
after  the  miracle  of  feeding,  and  give  the  sign  for  a 
national  revolt.  For  the  moment  expectation  ran  high. 
It  is  hardly  surprising,  that  when  such  hopes  were 
completely  dashed  by  the  events  of  the  ensuing  week, 
many  of  the  crowd  veered  round,  and  joiued  in  demand- 
ing the  death  of  Jesus ;  or  that  at  any  rate  His 
supporters  were  too  few  to  raise  any  effectual  protest 
against  the  public  vote  cast  for  His  condemnation. 
The  Chro-  According  to  the  Synoptic  account  Jesus  was  occupied 
of  Events  c^urmg  the  succeeding  days  with  teaching  in  the  temple, 
returning  each  night  to  Bethany.  It  would  appear,  as 
we  have  already  suggested,  that  the  Synoptic  outline 
has  massed  together  in  this  portion  of  its  narrative  a 
number  of  incidents  and  teachings,  some  of  which  belong 
really  to  visits  made  by  Jesus  to  Jerusalem  earlier  in 
the  ministry.  This  displacement  was  rendered  necessary, 
if  they  were  not  to  omit  these  narratives  altogether, 
since  they  record  no  other  visit.  Thus  the  cleansing 
of  the  temple  and  the  question  of  the  Pharisees  as  to 


THE  LAST  WEEK  OF  THE  MINISTRY     221 

the  authority  by  which  Christ  acted  have  been  treated 
in  connexion  with  the  first  visit.  At  the  same  time  it 
is  not  improbable,  seeing  that  there  was  a  desire  to 
elicit  from  our  Lord  some  utterance  which  should  form 
the  ground  for  a  charge  against  Him  before  the  Roman 
authorities,  that  various  attempts,  having  this  object, 
were  at  this  time  made  by  His  opponents,  as  is  repre- 
sented in  the  Synoptic  outline. 

In  the  course  of  one  of  the  visits  of  Jesus  to  the  city  The 
from  Bethany,  accompanied  by  His  disciples,  occurred  0^I^qS 
the    incident   of   the   cursing    of    the    barren    fig-tree.  Fig-tree. 
This  clearly  belongs  to  the  class  of  miracles  which  were  ^u*1' 
intended  as  parables  in  action.  20-25. 

Some  have  found  a  difficulty  in  this  act  of  our  Lord,  18%2 
as  involving  a  wanton  and  unnecessary  destruction  of  Cf.  Luke 
life,  and  it  has  even  been  suggested  that  a  parable,  xm" 
identical  with  or  similar  to  that  of  the  withered  fig-tree 
in  St.  Luke,  has  by  a  misunderstanding  been  represented 
by  St.  Mark  as  an  actual  occurrence.  This  view,  how- 
ever, finds  no  support  in  our  narratives,  and  we  know 
that  it  was  a  common  practice  of  Jesus  to  teach  by 
acts,  as  well  as  by  words.  Certainly  the  main  object 
of  the  miracle  was  instruction.  In  connexion  with  the 
circumstances  of  the  time,  and  especially  in  view  of 
the  recent  demonstration  at  the  Triumphal  Entry,  it 
represented  Christ's  verdict  on  the  Jewish  nation  and 
more  especially  its  leaders.  In  their  demonstrative  yet 
misguided  religious  zeal,  together  with  their  ineffective 
display  of  Messianic  enthusiasm,  they  resembled  this 
tree  with  its  show  of  leaves  yet  with  no  fruit  beneath. 
No  doubt  in  this,  as  in  other  instances,  the  underlying 
meaning  of  Christ's  act  would  only  be  discerned  gradu- 
ally by  the  eyewitnesses. 

St.  Mark   relates   that   on  passing  the  spot  on   the 


222    OUTLINES  OF  THE  SYNOPTIC  RECORD 

following  morning  Peter  called  the  attention  of  his 
Master  to  the  fact  that  the  tree  was  already  withered, 
and  that,  thereupon,  Jesus  drew  from  the  incident  a 
lesson  of  the  power  of  faith  in  prayer,  to  which  nothing 
should  be  impossible :  '  Verily  I  say  unto  you,  Whoso- 
ever shall  say  unto  this  mountain,  Be  thou  taken  up 
and  cast  into  the  sea ;  and  shall  not  doubt  in  his  heart, 
but  shall  believe  that  what  he  saith  cometh  to  pass; 
he  shall  have  it.'  He  then  adds  the  further  condition, 
Of.  found  in  the  Sermon  on  the  Mount,  that  God  will  only 

Matt.  vi.     answer  prayer  if  it  is  offered  in  a  spirit  of  forgiveness 
towards  men.     Whether  St.  Mark  is  right  in  connecting 
these  comments  with  the  incident  of  the  fig-tree  must 
be  left  open  to  question. 
Encoun-         We  now  turn  to  consider  a  succession  of  encounters 
tors  in  the  m  tne  temple  courts  between  Jesus  and  His  opponents, 
standing  together  at  this  point  in  the  Synoptic  outline, 
(i)  He  is  first  met  by  a  combination  of  the  Pharisees 
(i)  Ques-     and  Herodians  \     Their  question  as  to  whether  it  was 
Pharisee 6  allowable  f°r  a  Jew  to  Pay  tribute  to  Caesar  was  in 
and  He-     truth  crucial  at  that  period  as  to  the  political  attitude 
Mark^ii     °^  any  one  wno  Maimed  to  be  a  national  leader.     Two 
13-17.        views  on  the  point  seem  to  have  prevailed  among  the 
15I29 XXU  Pharisees  themselves.     The  more  moderate  party  re- 
Luke  xx.    garded  the  Gentile  supremacy  as  a  Divine  chastisement, 
to  which  the  nation  was  required  to  submit,  until  God 
should  grant  deliverance ;    the   more   extreme,   on   the 
other   hand,    looked  upon  it   as  a  violation  of   God's 
supremacy  over  His  people  to  be  resisted  at  all  hazards. 
The  question  was  clearly  intended  to  place  Jesus  on  the 
horns  of  a  dilemma ;  if  He  declared  such  payment  to 
be  unlawful,  He  could  be  at  once  arraigned  before  the 
Roman  governor  on  a  charge  of  disloyalty ;  on  the  other 
1  See  Additional  Note. 


THE  LAST  WEEK  OF  THE  MINISTRY     223 

hand,  to  counsel  submission  would  be  regarded  as  tanta- 
mount to  a  surrender  of  all  claim  to  be  regarded  as 
the  national  Messiah.  Christ  penetrated  at  once  this 
malicious  scheme.  Calling  for  a  Roman  denarius,  He 
pointed  to  the  image  and  superscription  which  it  bore, 
and  asked  whose  it  was.  On  their  replying  '  Caesar's,' 
He  answered,  '  Render  unto  Caesar  the  things  that  are 
Caesar's,  and  unto  God  the  things  that  are  God's.'  The 
circulation  of  Roman  coinage  implied  on  their  part 
a  recognition  of  the  authority  of  the  Roman  govern- 
ment. At  the  same  time  He  showed  that  such  sub- 
mission to  human  authority  was  in  no  way  inconsistent, 
as  they  implied,  with  obedience  to  God's  rule.  The 
two  spheres  of  duty  were  independent,  and  there  need 
be  no  clashing  between  their  claims.  Thus  the  answer 
laid  down  a  principle  of  far-reaching  application.  At 
the  same  time,  the  attitude  taken  up  by  Jesus  on  the 
question  involved  a  decisive  refusal  on  His  part  to 
countenance  the  material  hopes  of  His  countrymen,  by 
heading  a  rising  against  Roman  sovereignt}7.  Thereby 
in  truth  it  sealed  His  own  fate,  proving  unmistakably 
that  He  was  in  no  way  such  a  Messiah  as  the  nation 
demanded. 

(ii)  The  next  attempt  came  from  the  Sadducees.    The  (ii)  Ques- 
question   they  put  to  Jesus  was  probably  a  weapon  j^011^ 
commonly  employed  in  argument  with  their  Pharisaic  ducees. 
opponents,  to  show  the  absurd  consequences  involved  J?1^*11, 
in  drawing  from  Scripture  a  doctrine  of  the  Resurrection,  m  itt.  xxii. 

They  put  forward  the  case  of  a  woman  who,  in  accordance  ?3-,?3" 

J  *-  Luke  xx. 

with  the  Levitical  law,  had  married  seven  brothers,  each  27-40. 
one  of  whom  died  childless,  and  asked,  '  In  the  resurrec- 
tion whose  wife  shall  she  be  of  them  ? '     Our  Lord  first 
answers  their  supposed  difficulty  by  showing  that  it 
rests  on  an  entirely  wrong  conception  as  to  the  character 


224    OUTLINES  OF  THE  SYNOPTIC  RECORD 

of  the  Resurrection  life ;  as  if  in  it  there  must  be  a  con- 
tinuance of  the  conditions  prevailing  in  this  life.     'Is 
it  not,'  He  says,  'for  this  cause  that  ye  err,  that  ye 
know  not  the  Scriptures,  nor  the  power  of  God  ? '    In 
that  life,   He  declares,  sexual   relations   cease :    '  They 
neither  marry,  nor  are  given  in  marriage;   but  are  as 
angels  in  heaven.'     But  He  goes  on  further  to  refute 
them  by  giving  from  Scripture  itself  a  positive  proof  of 
the  Resurrection.     He  points  them  to  the  evidence  of 
the  passage  'concerning  the  Bush,'  where  God  speaks 
of  Himself  as  the  God  of  the  patriarchs,  from  which  the 
inference   follows   that   in    their    case   there    existed   a 
continued   personal   relationship   to  Him  unbroken  by 
death :    '  He  is  not  the  God  of  the  dead,  but  of  the 
living.'      It  is  important  to  notice  that  our  Lord  here 
bases  the  doctrine  of  the  Resurrection  on  the  fact  of 
relationship  to  a  living  God. 
(iii)  The         (iii)  The  next  question  of  the  series  is  put  by  a  Scribe, 
of  the°n     wno   *s   sa^   t°   have   heard   and   approved  of   Jesus' 
Scribe.       answer    to   the   Sadducees.     The   question   dealt  with 
28-34 X11'    a  subject  which  seems  to  have  been  a  standing  ground 
Matt.  xxii.  of  discussion  in  the  Pharisaic  schools — namely,  which 
Luke  xx     was    t°    be    considered    the   first    or   most   important 
39,  40.        commandment  of  the  law.    The  motive  of  the  questioner 
25-37!  G   '  m  ^n^s  case  *s  doubtful,  and  is  variously  represented  in 
our  accounts.    Its  aim  may  have  been  to  throw  discredit 
upon  Jesus  by  criticizing  the  inadequacy  of  any  answer 
He  might  give.    Jesus  replied  by  quoting  the  first  clause 
of   the   Shema    (Deut.   vi.  4),    the    profession   of    faith 
repeated    daily   by   every   Jew,    containing    the    great 
commandment  of  love  to  God,  and  beside  it  He  placed 
as   second  the   command   to    'love    thy   neighbour   as 
thyself.'      In  these,  He  declares,    the   whole  law   and 
prophets   are  summed  up.      The  Scribe  expressed   his 


THE  LAST  WEEK  OF  THE  MINISTRY     225 

approval  of  the  answer,  but  wishing  to  justify  himself 
by  showing  that  a  further  difficulty  still  remained,  he 
asked,  '  Who  is  my  neighbour  ? ' — who,  that  is,  are  to  be 
included  in  the  term  ?  This  question  Christ  answered  The 
by  the  Parable  of  the  Good  Samaritan.  The  meaning  J£e  aiod* 
of  that  parable  was  so  obvious  that,  when  he  was  Samaritan, 
confronted  with  the  question  '  Which  of  these  three,  29-37 .X" 
thinkest  thou,  proved  neighbour  unto  him  that  fell 
among  the  robbers  ? '  the  man  was  forced  to  draw  the 
conclusion,  opposed  as  it  was  to  the  principles  of  his 
class :  '  He  that  showed  mercy  on  him.'  Whereupon 
Jesus  forced  the  lesson  home  by  adding,  'Go,  and  do 
thou  likewise.'  Thus  by  this  parable  He  clearly  taught 
that  a  man  is  to  show  himself  a  neighbour  to  every  one, 
whatever  his  position  or  nationality,  whom  he  has  a 
chance  of  helping  in  any  way;  to  the  man  in  the 
parable,  who  needed  help,  when  his  own  countrymen 
failed,  the  Samaritan  proved  himself  indeed  his  neigh- 
bour. Thereby  Jesus  enunciated  what  was  to  a  Jew  an 
entirely  new  view  of  moral  obligation,  breaking  down 
all  the  exclusiveness  of  the  old  national  barriers. 

St.  Luke  has  placed  the  question  of  the  Scribe  in  his 
'great  Insertion,'  though  the  form  of  the  inquiry  in  his 
Gospel  is  slightly  different : '  What  shall  I  do  to  inherit 
eternal  life  ? '  And  he  alone  records  the  further  question 
of  the  Scribe  as  to  the  meaning  of  the  term  neighbour, 
and  the  parable  by  which  Jesus  answered  it.  This 
parable  may  well  have  come  to  him  only  as  a  fragment, 
apart  from  the  context,  and  been  placed  by  him,  as 
in  other  cases,  in  what  seemed  to  be  a  suitable  con- 
nexion. He  omits  the  Scribe's  question  where  it  occurs 
in  the  Marcan  outline,  but  adds  the  fact  that  certain 
of  the  Scribes  expressed  their  approval  of  Jesus'  answer 
to  the  Sadducees.     St.  Mark  mentions  that  the  Scribe 


226    OUTLINES  OF  THE  SYNOPTIC  RECORD 

repeated  with  approval  the  answer  of  Jesus  from  the 
Shema,  acknowledging  such  love  to  God  and  man,  as 
was  there  enjoined,  to  be  superior  to  *  all  whole  burnt- 
offerings  and  sacrifices.'  St.  Mark  adds  that  the  dis- 
cernment thus  shown  by  His  questioner  in  rightly 
appreciating  the  relative  importance  of  moral  and  cere- 
monial obligations,  won  for  him  from  Jesus  the  assurance 
that  he  was  not  far  from  the  Kingdom  of  God. 
Direct  With  these  attempts  of   His   opponents   to   ensnare 

™ntl~.    .     Jesus,  our  sources  connect  a  series  of  His  own  teachings 

Pharisaic  .  . 

Teachings,  directed  against  the  Pharisees.  It  is  probable  that  in 
this  case,  too,  we  have,  collected  into  one  discourse, 
utterances  made  at  different  times  in  the  course  of  His 
Parable  ministry.  Immediately  before  the  succession  of  ques- 
w^k  d  ti°ns  Just  related  is  placed  the  Parable  of  the  Wicked 
Husband-  Husbandmen.  The  meaning  of  this  parable  was  plain 
Marie  xii  enougn  t°  His  hearers,  since  the  imagery  employed  had 
1-12.  been  rendered  familiar  to  them  in  the  Old  Testament. 

33-46 XX1'  Israel  nad  often  been  represented  by  the  prophets  as 
Luke  xx.  God's  vineyard.  It  would  be  generally  understood  that 
here,  by  the  husbandmen,  Jesus  pointed  to  the  nation, 
and  more  especially  the  national  leaders.  Herein  re- 
cognizing clearly  the  inevitable  result  of  His  mission, 
He  showed  how  the  fate  which  should  be  inflicted  on 
God's  own  Son  was  only  a  repetition  of  the  treatment 
meted  out  to  God's  messengers  at  all  times  in  the 
nation's  history.  He  closes  the  parable  with  the  warning 
that  the  privileges  which  they  had  rejected  should  be 
taken  away  and  given  to  others ;  another  hint  of  the 
coming  extension  of  God's  Kingdom  to  the  Gentiles. 
When  His  hearers,  at  the  prospect  of  such  a  judgement, 
exclaimed  (so  St.  Luke  relates),  'God  forbid,'  Jesus 
Ps.  cxviii.  replied  by  quoting  the  saying  of  the  Psalmist  as  to  the 
'  stone  rejected  by  the  builders  becoming  '  the  head  of 


THE  LAST  WEEK  OF  THE  MINISTRY     227 

the  corner,'  in  fulfilment  of  the  Lord's  purposes;  His 
meaning  being  that  this  saying,  having  reference  origin- 
ally to  the  Jewish  nation,  which,  though  rejected  by 
the  great  nations  of  the  world,  became  in  the  Divine 
Providence  the  Chosen  People  of  God,  the  corner-stone 
of  His  fabric,  should  find  its  fulfilment  in  the  treatment 
of  His  own  Messianic  claims ;  since  He,  though  rejected 
by  His  own  nation,  should  yet  prove  the  chief  corner- 
stone of  the  new  Ecclesia  of  God,  to  be  raised  on  the 
ruins  of  the  old  Israelite  Theocracy. 

St.  Mark's  words  in  introducing  this  parable,  'He 
began  to  speak  unto  them  in  parables,'  may  imply  that 
he  found  in  his  source  other  parables  placed  in  this 
connexion.  One  of  these,  the  Parable  of  the  Marriage 
Feast,  which  occurs  here  in  St.  Matthew  and  possibly 
forms  a  pair  with  that  which  precedes,  has  been  already 
treated  in  the  connexion  in  which  it  occurs  in  St.  Luke. 

At   the   conclusion   of    their   questions   is   related   a  Question 

question  put  by  Jesus  Himself,  either  to  the  Pharisees  ag  to 

directlv  or  to  the  people,  with  the  object  of  showing  the  Messiah. 
*  .  Mark  xii. 

inconsistency  of  the  Messianic  teaching  of  the  Scribes  35.37. 

themselves  with  Scripture.     He  asked  how  the  opening  Matt.  xxii. 

words  of  Psalm  ex — a  psalm  universally  recognized  as  Luke  ^x 

Messianic — '  The  Lord  said  unto  my  Lord,  Sit  thou  on  41-44. 

My  right  hand,  till  I  make  thine  enemies  the  footstool  Ps*  cx'  *' 

of  thy  feet,'  could  be  explained  in  accordance  with  the 

exclusive  emphasis  laid  in  their  teaching  on  the  human 

descent  of  the  Christ  from  David.     This  passage  showed 

that  the  portraiture  of  Scripture  could  not  be  satisfied 

by  the   idea  of   a  merely  human  Messiah  of  Davidic 

lineage;    in  fact,  that  in  adhering  to  such  a  view  they 

were  looking  for  the  Messiah  on  entirely  wrong  lines. 

Jesus'  use  of  the  passage  of  course  in  no  way  involves 

a  denial  of  His  own  Davidic  ancestry.     He  would  point 

Q2 


228     OUTLINES  OF  THE  SYNOPTIC  RECORD 

out  that  the  words,  while  indeed   they   implied   this., 
demanded  more ;  they  could  only  refer  to  a  Messiah  far 
greater  than  David.     It  may  be  said  in  passing  that, 
clearly,  the  Davidic  authorship   of   the  psalm,  though 
now  generally  rejected,  was  in  that  age  unquestioned ; 
and  there  is  no  difficulty  in  assuming  that  on  critical 
questions  of  this   character  Jesus  was  subject  to  the 
same  limitations  of  knowledge  as  His  contemporaries. 
He  thus  met  His  opponents  on  their  own  ground,  with 
an  argument  from  Scripture  to  which  they  could  find 
Direct        no  answer.     Then  follows  a  number   of  Jesus'  direct 
Denuncia-  denunciations  of  the  religious  classes,  setting  out  those 
Mark  xii.    faults  in   their  teaching,  conduct,  and   temper,  which 
38-40.        had  continually  brought  Him  into  collision  with  them 
3_7t  '  XUI'  throughout   His   ministry.     St.   Matthew,  who   relates 
Luke  xi.     these  most  fully,  has  probably  here,  as  in  other  cases, 
xx^  45-47.  grouped  together  in  one  connected  discourse  the  anti- 
Pharisaic  teaching  of  Jesus,  addressed  at  different  times 
to  the  disciples  or  a  wider  audience.     He  first  bids  His 
disciples   pay   to   the   commands   of    the   Scribes   and 
Pharisees  the  deference   due   to  their  position  as  the 
recognized   teachers  of   the  nation,   the   official   repre- 
sentatives of  Moses;   but,  at  the  same  time,  he  warns 
them  against  imitating  the  harsh  unsympathetic  temper 
in  which  they  exercised  their  intellectual  power  over 
others,  and  the  petty  self-ostentation  which  character- 
Matt,  xxiii.  ized  their  methods  and  acts.     His  disciples  are  not  to 
8"10,  accept  titles  of  honour  such  as  Rabbi  or  Master,  'for 

one  is  your  teacher;  and  all  ye  are  brethren,'  and  '  one 
is  your  master,  even  the  Christ.'  Nor  was  any  one  of 
them  on  earth  to  form  for  himself  a  personal  following, 
and  be  called  Father,  '  For  One  is  your  Father,  which  is 
in  heaven.' 

Jesus  then  in  scathing  terms  draws  out  His  indict- 


THE  LAST  WEEK  OF  THE  MINISTRY     229 

ment  against  the  Scribes  and  Pharisees.     His  denuncia- 
tion singles  out  in  turn  one  failure  after  another  in  their 
conduct  and  teaching:    (a)  their  attempt  to  exclude  all  14. 
others  from  the  religious  privileges  which  they  themselves 
would  not  use ;    (b)  their  spirit  of  proselytism ;   (c)  the  15. 
foolish  casuistry  of  their  teaching  with  regard  to  oaths ; 
(d)  their  pedantic  observance  of  ceremonial  details  of  the  16-22. 
law  to  the  neglect  of   moral  principles,  causing  them 
'  to  strain  out  the  gnat,  and  swallow  the  camel';  (e)  their  23,  24. 
petty  scruples  as  to  external  defilement,  combined  with 
indifference   to   pollution  of   the    heart;    (/)  the  utter  25. 
hypocrisy  of  their  character,  making  them  like  whited 
tombs,  fair  without  but  foul  within,     (g)  He  then  sums  27,  28. 
up  with  a  denunciation  of  their  pretended  religious  zeal, 
causing  them  to  '  build  the  tombs  of  the  prophets '  by  29-86. 
professing  to  uphold  the  letter  of  their  teaching,  while 
in  fact  they  are  proving  themselves  by  their  treatment 
of  Jesus  the  spiritual  descendants  of  those  who  in  all 
ages  of  the  nation's  history  have  maltreated  and  slain 
God's  messengers.     He  declares  that  the  blood  of  all 
these  murdered  servants  of  God  shall  be  visited  on  the 
men  of  that  generation.     Jesus  ends  His  denunciation  Lament 
with  words  of  passionate  lament  over  Jerusalem,  '  which  rusaieni. 
killeth  the  prophets,  and  stoneth  them   that   are  sent  Matt.xxiii. 
unto  her.'  '  How  often,'  He  cries,  '  would  I  have  gathered  q^ 
thy   children   together,   even   as   a   hen   gathereth  her  Luke  xix- 
chickens   under   her  wings ' ;    but   now,  He   adds,   the 
obstinate  refusal  of   His  countrymen   had  sealed  their 
fate  :  'And  ye  would  not.'     Wherefore  the  final  sentence 
which  they  had  brought  upon  themselves  by  their  own 
conduct  goes  forth  against  them,  '  Behold,  your  house 
is  left  unto  you  desolate.     For  I  say  unto  you,  Ye  shall 
not  see  Me  henceforth,  till  ye  shall  say,  Blessed  is  He 
that  cometh  in  the  name  of  the  Lord.' 


230    OUTLINES  OF  THE  SYNOPTIC  RECORD 

The  The  Marcan  source  connects  with  these  discourses  one 

Mites  singularly  beautiful  incident.  Jesus  with  His  disciples 
Mark  xii.  was  sitting  in  the  Court  of  the  Women  watching  the 
Liike  xxi.  crow(l  of  worshippers  as  they  cast  their  offerings  into 
1-4.  the   temple   treasury.      Among    the    wealthier    donors 

came  one  poor  widow,  who  cast  in  two  mites1,  making 
a  farthing.  Jesus,  calling  the  attention  of  His  disciples 
to  her  gift,  declared  that  she  had  in  truth  given  more 
than  all  the  rest ;  for  while  they  had  cast  in  either  more 
or  less  out  of  their  superfluity,  she  out  of  her  poverty 
had  contributed  her  entire  living.  This  incident  may 
quite  possibly  have  been  placed  in  this  connexion  in 
the  Gospel  outline  as  affording  a  striking  illustration, 
in  act,  of  the  contrast  between  the  outward  formal  osten- 
tation which  distinguished  the  religion  of  the  Pharisees, 
and  had  drawn  forth  the  denunciation  of  Jesus,  and  the 
temper  of  genuine  yet  unpretentious  devotion  to  God 
shown  by  the  deed  of  this  poor  widow. 


ADDITIONAL  NOTE  TO  CHAPTER  XIV. 
THE  HERODIANS. 

See 'He-  The  term,  according  to  the  regular  meaning  of 
rodmns'  adjectives  with  the  termination  -ai/05,  refers  to  ad- 
ings'2!i>.  nerents  of  the  house  of  Herod.  They  appear  to  have 
vol.  ii.'  '  been  a  political  party  among  the  Jews,  which  sought 
for  the  restoration  of  the  national  independence 
under  the   rule   of   one   of   the   Herods.     They  would 

1  The  mite  or  lepton  was  the  smallest  bronze  coin  in  circulation 
among  the  Jews.  It  was  a  Greek  coin,  equal  in  value  to  half  a 
Latin  quadrans  (a  farthing),  which  was  itself  a  fourth  part  of  an 
as  ;  the  as  being  at  this  time  worth  about  a  halfpenny  of  our 
money. 


THE  LAST  WEEK  OF  THE  MINISTRY     231 

therefore  desire  to  oust  the  existing  rule  of  the  Roman 
procurators,  and  to  this  extent  would  be  in  sympathy 
with  the  objects  of  the  Pharisees,  though  not  sharing 
their  ideal  of  a  true  Theocracy.  They  would  be  willing 
to  enter  into  a  temporary  alliance  with  them  for  the 
overthrow  of  Jesus,  in  whom  both  parties  recognized 
a  fatal  obstacle  to  the  success  of  their  ideals. 


CHAPTER  XV 

ESCHATOLOGICAL    TEACHING 

Mark  xiii  (cf .  xii.  18-27) ;  Matthew  xxiv,  xxv ;  Luke 
xii.  35— xiii.  9,  xvii.  20-37,  xix.  11-27  (cf.  xvi. 
19-31),  xxi.  5-36. 

Eschato         At  this  point  in  the  Marc  an  narrative  is  introduced 
JMscourse  a  discourse  which  is   generally  known  as  the  'Escha- 
Mark  xiii.  tological '   discourse.     Eschatology,  or  the   doctrine   of 
the  last  things,  was  at  this  time  quite  a  special  depart- 
ment of  Jewish  theology,  and  the  subject  held  powerful 
sway  over  the  popular   imagination,  to  judge   by  the 
comparatively  large   amount   of   nearly   contemporary 
literature  which  has  been  preserved. 
Jewish  Bound    down   as    they  were    by   Scribism,   both    as 

oftlieTvV0  regards  interpretation  and  practice  of  the  law,  the 
Ages.  Jews  were  far  less  restricted  in  their  speculations  as 
to  the  future.  It  is  true  that  the  main  lines  of  such 
speculation  were  laid  down  for  them  by  an  ever-increas- 
ing tendency  to  dogmatism,  but  they  were  left  to  their 
own  discretion  in  the  details.  Hence,  in  eschatological 
literature,  we  find  great  divergence  of  opinion,  and, 
though  it  was  generally  believed  that  certain  things 
would  happen,  there  was  no  such  general  agreement  as 
to  how,  when,  or  in  what  sequence  they  would  happen. 
Thus  it  was  generally  believed  that  the  history  of  the 


ESCHATOLOGICAL  TEACHING  233 

world  consisted  of  two  ages — the  present  (or  '  this  age ') 
and  the  future  (or  '  that  age ').  Allusions  to  this  current 
conception  are  not  infrequent  in  the  Synoptic  Gospels. 
(Cf.  Luke  xvi.  8,  '  the  sons  of  this  age ' ;  Matt.  xiii.  40, 
'the  completion  (or  end)  of  the  age';  Matt.  xii.  32,  'in 
this  age  or  in  the  future  age ' ;  Luke  xx.  34,  '  the  sons 
of  this  age  .  .  .  but  those  who  are  deemed  worthy  to 
share  in  that  age.')  But  there  was  no  general  agree- 
ment as  to  how  or  when  the  present  age  should  end  and 
the  future  age  begin. 

In  the  light  of  this  doctrine  of  the  two  ages  the  The 
eschatological  significance  of  the  question  of  the  select  ofttJelon 
three  to  their  Master  is  clear.  By  His  prophetic  an-  Disciples, 
nouncement,  'There  shall  not  remain  one  stone  upon 
another  which  shall  not  be  overthrown  (KaraXvO-^) ,' — an 
echo  of  His  former  utterance  at  the  first  Passover  (John 
ii.  19),  and  with  equal  claim  to  be  regarded  as  the 
groundwork  of  the  accusation  made  against  Him  at  His 
trial, — the  disciples  must  have  understood  more  than 
a  mere  announcement  that  the  temple  buildings  would 
be  destroyed ;  and  when  they  asked,  '  Tell  us  when  shall 
these  things  be,  and  what  is  the  sign  when  all  these 
things  are  about  to  be  brought  to  completion  (o-vvre- 
Acto-tfai),'  it  is  as  though  they  were  asking  their  Master 
to  pass  judgement  on  current  eschatological  beliefs  and 
to  solve  for  them,  in  regard  to  the  doctrine  of  the  two 
ages,  those  points  on  which  the  speculators  of  the  day 
were  not  entirely  in  agreement.  The  kind  of  answer 
usually  given  by  such  speculators  to  the  second  part  of 
the  question  ('What  is  the  sign?')  can  be  ascertained 
from  the  literature  of  that  time,  in  which  we  read  of 
the  persecution  of  the  righteous,  of  an  increase  of  sin, 
of  wars,  and  of  internecine  strife,  extending  even  to 
members  of  the  same  family ;  and  of  portents,  such  as 


234    OUTLINES  OF  THE  SYNOPTIC  RECORD 

are  described  by  Livy  in  his   account   of   the  second 
Carthaginian  war. 
General  Before  discussing  Jesus'  answer  to  the  question,  one 

tionsTas  to"  or  tw0  general  considerations  must  be  noticed. 
Jesus'  (i)  The  subject  of  eschatological  teaching  in  general 

logical0"  anc*  °f  tms  discourse  in  particular  is  such  that  it  is  more 
Teaching,  possible  here  than  in  teaching  of  a  different  character 
that  the  report  of  the  words  of  Jesus  was  coloured  by 
the  ideas  of  the  early  Christians ;  and  such  discourses, 
which  can  have  been  by  no  means  easy  for  the  hearers 
to  understand  at  the  time  when  they  were  delivered, 
naturally  presented  great  difficulties  to  those  who 
afterwards  transmitted  them. 

(ii)  It  is  not  necessary  to  suppose  that  the  whole 
of  this  discourse  was  delivered  on  this  particular 
occasion,  for  St.  Mark  may  have  grouped  various 
utterances  together.  It  is  important  to  bear  in  mind 
this  possibility,  by  means  of  which  many  difficulties  are 
more  easily  solved,  and  particularly  in  eschatological 
teaching  peculiar  to  the  first  Evangelist,  of  whom  such 
grouping  is  known  to  be  characteristic.  In  the  Marcan 
discourse  the  internal  discrepancies  are  such  as,  in  the 
opinion  of  some  scholars,  can  only  be  accounted  for  by 
the  hypothesis  that  a  Jewish  Apocalypse  has  been 
grafted  on  to  it.  At  any  rate,  the  whole  discourse 
appeared  in  its  present  form  in  the  Marcan  source  which 
was  used  both  by  St.  Matthew  and  St.  Luke. 
Matt.xxiv.  (ih)  St.  Matthew  characteristically  combines  this  dis- 
course with  other  eschatological  matter,  mostly  from 
the  Logia.  In  this  Gospel  and  in  St.  Luke  certain  devia- 
tions from  the  Marcan  source  attract  the  attention. 
Mark  xiii.  Thus,  where  in  St.  Mark  we  read,  '  But  when  ye  see  the 
Luke  xxi  aDommation  of  desolation,'  we  read  in  St.  Luke,  '  But 
20.  when  ye  see  Jerusalem  being  encompassed  by  armies ' : 


ESCHATOLOGICAL  TEACHING  235 

and  for  the  words  which  follow  in  St.  Mark,  '  standing 
where  it  ought  not,'  are  substituted  in  St.  Matthew, 
'standing  in  the  holy  place.'  This  expansion  of  the 
words  of  Jesus  as  found  in  the  Marcan  source,  due  to 
the  influence  of  events  which  occurred  subsequent  to  the 
time  of  delivery,  lends  additional  support  to  the  sugges- 
tion made  above  that  the  words  of  the  discourse  as  found 
in  St.  Mark's  Gospel  may  themselves  be  a  modification 
of  those  which  were  originally  spoken. 

The  discourse  begins  with  a  warning  addressed  to  the  Analysis 
disciples,   (a)  not  to  be  led  away  by  false  teachers  or  discourse, 
false  Messiahs,  and  (6)  not  to  be  terrified  by  wars  and  Mark  xiii. 
rumours  of   wars.      For  neither   national   nor  natural 
convulsions  were   to   be  immediate  signs  of   the   end. 
Verses  9-11  foretell  the  persecutions  to  which  the  disci-  9-11. 
pies  must  be  exposed  in  their  work  of  proclaiming  to  all 
the  nations  the  good  news  of  the  Kingdom ;   and  that 
work  must  be  accomplished  before  the  end.     So,  too, 
internecine  strife  even  between  members  of  the  same 
family  was  a  necessary  result  of  that  proclamation,  and 
in  one  sense  Jesus  could  say  of  Himself,  '  I  came  not  to  Matt.  x.  34. 
send  peace,  but  a  sword.'     This  passage  seems  to  some  xi->  51  e 
extent  to  break    the  continuity  of  the  discourse,  and 
verse  14  is  more  closely  connected  with  verse  8  than 
with  the  verse  which  immediately  precedes  it  (ver.  13). 
(Ver.  8,  'This  is  the  beginning  of  travail  .  .  .';  ver.  14, 
'  But  when  ye  see  .  .  .  then  let  those  who  are  in  Judaea 
flee.') 

The  more  immediate  signs  or  events  which  will  attend 
the  end  of  the  '  present  age '  are  then  detailed. 

(i)   '  The  abomination  of  desolation  standing  where  it  14-16. 
ought  not  (let  him  that  readeth  understand).'    In  this 
enigmatical  utterance  the  reference  is  to  the  desecration 
of  the  altar  in  the  days  of  Antiochus  Epiphanes  (cf .  Dan. 


236     OUTLINES  OF  THE  SYNOPTIC  RECORD 

ix.  27,  xi.  31,  and  xii.  11,  1  Mace.  i.  54).  The  words 
'Let  him  that  readeth  understand'  may  mean  either 
(a)  Let  him  that  readeth  the  Book  of  Daniel  understand 
the  passage  to  refer  ultimately  to  the  end  of  the 
*  present  age,'  or  (b)  Let  him  that  readeth  this  (Marcan) 
narrative  understand  its  meaning  in  the  light  of  events 
which  are  happening  at  the  time  of  writing.  In  the 
first  case  the  words  are  more  probably  those  of  Jesus 
than  of  the  Evangelist :  in  the  second  case  the  sentence 
is  a  parenthesis  inserted  by  the  Evangelist,  and  if  we 
could  be  sure  that  this  is  the  correct  interpretation  it 
would  be  valuable  evidence  of  date1.  What  was  meant 
by  the  '  abomination  of  desolation '  could  not  have  been 
clear  at  the  time  to  Jesus'  hearers,  but  He  Himself  pro- 
bably alluded  to  some  definite  future  event.  St.  Luke, 
as  we  have  seen,  interprets  the  expression  as  having 
reference  to  the  siege  of  Jerusalem,  and  this  may  well 
have  been  a  true  explanation  of  what  Jesus  meant  at 
the  time,  when  He  foretold  a  desecration  of  the  altar. 
This  sign  was  to  be  a  signal  for  flight  to  those  who  had 
been  forewarned.  In  connexion  with  this  passage  it  is 
interesting  to  note  that,  immediately  before  the  siege 
of  Jerusalem  began,  whereas  the  Jews  flocked  into  the 
city  for  safety,  the  Christians,  according  to  Josephus, 
departed  from  Jerusalem  to  Pella  'in  consequence  of 
a  Divine  admonition.' 

17-20.  (ii)  A  general  statement  follows  that  the  end  will  be 
preceded  by  a  great  and  unparalleled  tribulation,  de- 
scribed in  apocalyptic  language  founded  on  the  Book  of 

21-23.  Daniel.  The  warning  against  false  Messiahs,  imme- 
diately after  this,  seems  to  be  out  of  place  in  this 
context. 

1  '  fteadeth '  may  be  used  here  in  the  strict  sense  of  '  readeth 
aloud1  (e.g.  in  the  church). 


ESCHATOLOGICAL  TEACHING  237 

(iii)  The  great  tribulation  was  to  be  followed  by  por-  24-27. 
tents,  such  as  the  darkening  of  the  sun  and  moon,  and 
the  falling  of  the  stars  from  heaven.  Then  would  take 
place  the  appearance  ('  Parousia  ')  of  the  Son  of  Man, — 
described  in  the  language  of  Daniel  and  Zechariah  (Dan. 
vii.  13,  cf.  Zech.  ii,  Deut.  xxx.  4). 

The  more  purely  apocalyptic  character  of  the  dis- 
course ends  here,  and  the  rest  is  more  didactic  in 
character. 

(a)  The  disciples  are  told  that  by  these  signs  they  may  28,  29. 
know  that  the  end  (of  the  '  present  age ' )  is  at  hand,  as 
clearly  as  they  may  know  that  the  summer  is  at  hand 
when  they  see  green  leaves  upon  a  fig-tree. 

(b)  They  are  assured  that  it  will  come  to  pass  within  30. 
their  own  generation. 

Jesus  concluded  by  declaring  solemnly  that  His  pre-  31. 
dictions  would  surely  be  fulfilled;  for  they  embodied 
the  Divine  decrees  which  were  not  transient  and  which 
would  outlast  the  destruction  of  the  present  state  of 
things.  'Heaven  and  earth  shall  pass  away,  but  My 
words  shall  not  pass  away.' 

These  words  form  an  impressive  peroration  to  the 
part  of  the  discourse  which  deals  with  the  end  of  the 
present  age.  What  follows  may  possibly  have  been 
spoken  on  a  different  occasion,  or  the  Evangelist  may 
have  given  too  little  emphasis  to  the  change  of  subject 
contained  in  the  following  verses. 

Whereas  Jesus  could  make  these  confident  assertions  32. 
with  respect  to  the  end  of  the  '  present  age,'  He  confessed 
that  He  had  no  knowledge  of  the  Day  of  Judgement 
('that  day')  or  of  the  time  at  which  that  should 
occur.  'But  of  that  day  or  hour  knoweth  no  man, 
not  the  angels  in  heaven,  not  the  Son,  only  the  Father.' 
Since  therefore  it  was  impossible  for  the  disciples  to  33-37. 


238     OUTLINES  OF  THE  SYNOPTIC  RECORD 

attain   to   this  knowledge,  it   remained  for   them   not 
to  indulge  in  idle  speculation,  but  to  be  as  watchful 
servants  waiting   for   the   coming   of   their   master  to 
them. 
Eschato-         The  eschatological  teaching  contained   in  the  Logia 
logical        js  0f  a  more  fragmentary  character  than  that  in   the 
in  the    '    Marcan  source.     The  chief  passages  are  Luke  xii.  35- 
Logia.        xjjj  9  an(j  xvji  20-37.    Most  of  this  matter  is  combined 
in  St.  Matthew  with  the  eschatological  discourse  found 
in   the   Marcan   source,  and   is   further  illustrated  by 
certain  eschatological  parables,  which  may  possibly  have 
been  derived  from  the  Logia. 
Luke  xii.        In   the   first  of   these   Lucan  passages   the   duty  of 
35-40.        watchfulness  is  impressed  upon  the  disciples  in  parabolic 
language.     They  are  compared  to  slaves  awaiting  the 
return  of  their  master  from  a  festal  gathering,  and  not 
knowing  at  what  hour  of  the  night  to  expect  him ;  they 
must,  therefore,  maintain  a  watchful  attitude  through- 
out the  whole  of  the  night.     Jesus  emphasizes  the  same 
point  by  appending  the  simile  of  a  bailiff,  or  chief  of 
the  slaves,  who  would  have  prevented  robbery  had  he 
known  at  what  hour  it  would  take  place.    This  teaching 
is   further    expanded   in   answer   to   Peter's   question : 
41.  '  Speakest  Thou  this  parable  to  us  (alone),  or  also  to 
42-48.  all  ? '     In   this  further  teaching   it   is  laid  down  that 
watchfulness  is  not  the  whole  duty  of  servants,  but  also 
(a)  faithfulness  and  (b)  prudence,  and  it  is  pointed  out 
that  the  faithful  servant  will  be  rewarded,  while  the 
unfaithful    servant   will    be    punished,   but   that   such 
punishment  will  be  in  proportion  to  the  responsibility 
of  each.     Thus,  Jesus  seems  to  show  that,  while  He  is 
speaking  primarily  to  the  disciples,  yet  He  does  not 
exclude  others. 

The  duty  of  trustworthiness,  and  the  truth  that  rewards 


ESCHATOLOGICAL  TEACHING  239 

and   punishments   are  in   proportion   to   responsibility. 

are  further  illustrated  by  the  Parable  of  the  Talents 

(Matt.  xxv.  14-30)  and  of  the  Pounds  (Luke  xix.  11-27). 

And  again  in  the  Parable  of  the   '  Sheep  and  Goats '  Matt.  xxv. 

(or  the  Last  Judgement)  the  truth  of  world-wide  judge-  31~46- 

ment  according  to  responsibility  is  emphasized,  and  it 

is  shown  that  such  responsibility  does  not  extend  only 

to  that  nation  which  has  had  personal  contact  with  the 

Messiah.     The  exhortation  to  prudence  is  illustrated  in  Matt.  xxv. 

the  Parable  of   the  Prudent  and  Thoughtless  Virgins.  1_18, 

That  the  duty  of  prudence  rather  than  of  watchfulness 

is  the  central  point  of  that  parable  is  shown  by  the  fact 

that  all  the  ten  sleep,  but  only  five  have  made  provision 

beforehand. 

Further  teaching  follows  as  to  the  signs  of  the  end.  Luke  xii. 
Current  expectations  are  confirmed  by  the  prophecy  of 
coming  strife  and  dissension,  described  in  language 
similar  to,  and  perhaps  in  part  derived  from,  the  Marcan 
discourse  ;  and  the  people  are  warned  against  neglecting 
those  evident  signs  of  imminent  judgement  which  are 
before  their  eyes :  for  these  signs  are  as  certain  pre- 
cursors of  the  Judgement  as  are  clouds  of  rain  and 
southerly  breeze  of  heat.  The  relations  between  the  Luke  xiii. 
Jews  and  their  Roman  rulers  were  ominous.  But  the 
true  signs  of  the  coming  Judgement  were  to  be  found  in 
the  sins  of  the  people ;  and  therefore  they  were  not  to 
think  that,  because  Pilate  had  murdered  certain  Gali- 
leans, or  because  certain  men  in  Siloam  had  been  killed 
by  a  falling  tower,  these  men  were  deserving  a  greater 
punishment  than  the  majority  of  the  nation.  Just  as 
an  unfruitful  fig-tree  might  be  left  for  three  years,  so 
the  nation  was  spared  only  for  a  time,  but  would  as  6-9. 
certainly  be  cut  down  at  last,  if  no  fruit  appeared. 

In  the  second  Lucan  passage  (xvii.  20-37),  on  being  20-21. 


240    OUTLINES  OF  THE  SYNOPTIC  RECORD 

asked  by  one  of  the  Pharisees  when  the  Kingdom  of 
God  should  come,  Jesus  replied   that   it  was   already 

22-25.  present  among  (or  within)  them.  To  this  saying  is 
appended  further  teaching  to  the  disciples  which  may 
have  been  a  further  answer  to  the  same  question  or 
may  have  been  spoken  on  a  different  occasion.  They 
were  warned  that  in  the  future  they  would  have  to  long 
in  vain  for  the  coming  of  the  Son  of  Man.  But  they 
must  beware  of  being  led  away  by  false  hopes,  for  His 
coming  would  be  as  clear  to  perceive  as  the  lightning 
flash.     But  first  He  must  suffer  and  be  rejected  by  His 

26-33.  contemporaries.  For  them  the  Day  of  Judgement  would 
be  as  unexpected  as  in  the  days  of  Noah  or  of  Lot,  and 
in  that  day  those  who  had  been  warned  must  flee 
without   delay,    remembering   the  fate   of   Lot's  wife. 

34-35.  The  connexion  between  this  passage  and  that  which 
immediately  follows  is  not  obvious  and  very  probably 
not  original.  Two  men  should  be  on  one  bed :  the  one 
should  be  taken  and  the  other  left.  Two  women  should 
be  grinding  at  the  same  place :  the  one  should  be  taken 
and  the  other  left.  By  '  taken '  we  may  understand 
the  meaning  to  be  either  '  delivered  from  doom '  or 
'  taken  away  by  doom.'  In  any  case,  the  meaning  is 
that  the  separation,  effected  by  the  coming  of  the  Son 
of  Man,  will  be  sudden. 
37.  In  answer  to  a  further  question  by  the  disciples — 
1  Where,  Master '  (sc.  will  the  Judgement  take  place)  ? 
Jesus  replied,  '  Where  the  dead  body  is,  there  will  the 
vultures  flock  together ' ;  i.  e.  as  surely  as  a  corpse 
attracts  birds  of  prey,  so  surely  will  sin  bring  judgement 
in  its  wake. 

At  this  point,  before  considering  further  the  problems 
connected  with  the  eschatological  teaching  of  Jesus,  it 
is  desirable  to  state  briefly  the  opinions   of   His  con- 


ESCHATOLOGICAL  TEACHING  241 

temporaries  as  to  the  future  Judgement  and  Resurrection 
of  the  dead. 

In  Jewish  thought  the  conception  of  the  Kingdom  of  Some 
God  was  entirely  eschatological.  Its  establishment  was  Eschato- 
to  be  dramatically  sudden,  and  that  event,  whether  logical 
expected  to  happen  within  the  present  or  the  future 
age,  was  practically  synchronous  with  the  end  of  the 
one  and  the  beginning  of  the  other.  It  was  to  be 
established  by  the  Messiah  Himself,  when  He  had  passed 
judgement  on  His  enemies  then  living  on  the  earth, 
either  forensically — by  the  word  of  His  mouth, — or  by 
His  actions — by  overthrowing  the  ungodly  powers  in 
battle.  Then,  when  the  dispersed  had  been  gathered 
together,  the  rule  (Kingdom)  of  the  Messiah  was  to 
begin.  According  to  the  older  views  this  rule  would 
be  eternal,  either  on  earth,  in  a  renovated  Jerusalem 
and  Palestine,  or — more  transcendentally  conceived — in 
a  Jerusalem  descending  from  heaven,  or  in  new  heavens 
and  a  new  earth.  But  it  was  more  common  in  the  time 
of  Jesus  to  believe  that  the  Messianic  Kingdom  would 
terminate  after  a  certain  lapse  of  time,  and,  therefore, 
that  its  sphere  was  confined  to  the  earth.  The  preceding 
Judgement  was,  according  to  the  older  view,  the  final  and 
only  Judgement ;  but,  according  to  the  later  and  more 
prevalent  view,  the  Final  Judgement  took  place  only  at 
the  termination  of  Messiah's  rule  on  earth. 

The  nature  of  this  temporary  Kingdom  was  described 
in  language  now  of  a  highly  spiritual,  now  of  a  grossly 
material  character.  The  material  conception  of  the 
Messiah's  rule  was  certainly  the  more  popular  in  the 
days  of  Jesus.  Deliverance  from  the  Romans  and 
the  establishment  of  temporal  power  for  Israel  were  the 
prevalent  aspirations.  But,  at  the  same  time,  there 
were  many  Simeons  and  Annas  in  Israel,  whose  outlook 


242    OUTLINES  OF  THE  SYNOPTIC  RECORD 


General 
Purport 
of  Jesus' 
Eschato- 


was  more  spiritual,  and  in  such  circles  the  distinction 
between  Jew  and  Gentile  became  less  marked,  and  there 
was  more  willingness  to  allow  the  Gentiles  to  participate 
in  the  blessings  of  the  Golden  Age. 

It  was  generally  believed  that  at  the  close  of  this  era 
the  Final  Judgement  would  take  place.  The  'Day  of 
the  Lord  '  was  its  technical  designation — a  term  founded 
on  Old  Testament  usage.  It  was  to  be  preceded  by 
the  Resurrection.  While  the  Sadducees  excluded  the 
Resurrection,  it  was  far  otherwise  with  the  majority  of 
the  people,  for  it  was  a  cardinal  feature  of  the  Pharisaic 
creed ;  but,  as  regards  its  nature,  opinions  varied.  By 
resurrection  the  Jews  did  not  mean  the  same  thing 
as  we  mean  by  the  immortality  of  the  soul.  To  them 
resurrection  was  the  return  of  the  dead  to  share  in  the 
rewards  or  punishments  of  those  who  were  alive  upon 
the  earth  at  the  time  of  the  Final  Judgement.  Thus, 
for  them,  resurrection  was  not  a  continued  state  of 
immortality,  but  the  beginning  of  such  a  state.  It  is 
probable,  too,  that  most  Jews  believed  in  a  bodily 
resurrection,  but  that  such  belief  was  influenced  in 
a  material  or  spiritual  direction  by  the  general  nature 
of  their  conception  of  the  future.  The  two  most  pre- 
valent views  seem  to  have  been  that  at  the  last  day 
there  would  be  a  resurrection,  either  (1)  of  all  men — 
good  and  bad,  or  (2)  only  of  the  righteous.  It  is  not 
certain  whether  by  the  latter  view  was  meant  that  the 
wicked  would  never  be  raised,  or  that  they  would  be 
excluded  merely  from  the  temporary  Messianic  Kingdom. 
Probably  the  belief  in  a  resurrection  only  of  the  right- 
eous was  the  more  prevalent  in  the  time  of  Jesus. 

We  may  now  proceed  to  consider  what  attitude  Jesus 
Himself  adopted  toward  the  current  expectations,  what 
He  accepted  and  what  He  rejected,  either  expressly  or 


ESCHATOLOGICAL  TEACHING  243 

by  implication,  in  the  light  of  His  reported  teaching,  the  logical 
substance  of  which  has  been  outlined  above. 

We  can,  at  the  outset,  confidently  assert  that  His  Prophetic 
teaching  must  have  been  prophetic  rather  than  apoca-  Jharf  Apo- 
lyptic  in  character ;  in  other  words,  His  object  never  calyptic. 
could  have  been  just  to  impress  the  imagination  by 
poetical  and  highly  coloured  pictures  of  the  future,  even 
though  He  may  have  employed  apocalyptic  language. 
Prophetic  teaching  did  not  consist  mainly  of  predictions 
of  what  was  to  happen,  but  was  of  a  distinctively  prac- 
tical and  moral  character ;  and  when  it  did  contain 
predictions,  such  predictions  were  intimately  connected 
with  and  based  upon  the  present.  Unbridled  imagination 
was  never  a  characteristic  of  prophecy.  Prophecy  dis- 
appeared at  the  close  of  Old  Testament  times,  only  to 
be  revived  in  the  appearance  of  John  the  Baptist  and 
of  Jesus  Himself.  It  was  not  so  with  apocalyptic 
teaching. 

When,  therefore,  we  find,  as  in  Mark  xiii.  24-27,  the 
use  of  apocalyptic  language  which  conveys  no  moral 
lesson  to  the  hearers,  but  merely  gratifies  their  curiosity, 
we  have  good  a  priori  grounds  for  doubting  whether  the 
teaching  at  this  point  has  been  accurately  handed  down. 
Without  resorting  to  the  theory  that  a  Jewish  Apocalypse 
has  been  grafted  on  to  the  teaching  of  Jesus,  we  may 
conjecture  that  the  language  has  been  coloured  or  ampli- 
fied— chiefly,  it  must  be  remembered,  in  words  taken 
from  the  Old  Testament — by  the  Evangelist  or  other 
Christians,  whose  minds  were  saturated  with  the 
favourite  speculations  of  the  day,  and  who  were  con- 
vinced that  Jesus  Himself  would  return  within  their 
own  lifetime.  Again,  much  of  the  apocalyptic  language 
and  imagery  used  by  Jesus  is  to  be  found  in  His 
parables,  and  in  these  it  must  be  remembered  that  it 

n  2 


244    OUTLINES  OF  THE  SYNOPTIC  RECORD 

only  forms  the  framework  in  which  the  central  lesson, 
always  moral  and  practical,  is  enshrined.  For  instance, 
in  the  Parable  of  Dives  and  Lazarus,  as  has  been  pointed 
out  already,  the  purpose  is  not  to  inculcate  a  belief  in 
the  current  doctrine  of  '  Abraham's  bosom,'  nor  should 
we  be  justified  in  concluding  from  that  parable  alone 
that  Jesus  even  so  much  as  sanctioned  any  belief  in  an 
intermediate  state.  But,  on  the  other  hand,  it  must 
not  be  thought  that,  because  certain  utterances  of  Jesus 
contain  predictions,  these  utterances  are  for  that  reason 
not  genuine,  or  are  to  be  regarded  with  suspicion.  It 
has  been  asserted  that  Jesus  could  not  have  foretold  the 
Fall  of  Jerusalem.  But  the  circumstances  of  the  political 
outlook  were  such  that  it  would  not  have  been  difficult 
for  any  clear-sighted  observer  to  conjecture  their  issue, 
and,  for  Jesus,  the  certainty  of  that  issue  was  grounded 
on  His  belief  that  the  judgement  of  God  must  fall  on 
the  nation  which  was  rejecting  its  true  Messiah. 

In  relation      It  is  at  once  clear  that  on  certain  points  the  teaching 

*°. the         of  Jesus  was  directly  at  variance  with  the  eschatological 

of  His        views  of  His  contemporaries. 

Contem-  ^  ^he  Kingdom  was  not,  in  His  teaching,  solely 
or  even  primarily  an  eschatological  conception.  It  has 
been  shown  that  He  taught  that  the  Kingdom  was 
already  set  up  upon  the  earth,  and  that  its  gradual 
evolution  was  proceeding,  as  of  a  seed  growing  secretly. 
It  follows  that  its  establishment  and  existence  on  earth 
were  not  relegated  by  Him  to  the  future. 

(ii)  Nor,  again,  was  there  anything  material  in  its 
nature.  For  the  definition  which  we  have  seen  to  be 
most  true  to  His  conception  of  that  nature  was  'The 
world  of  invisible  laws  by  which  God  is  blessing  and 
ruling  His  creatures.' 

It  is  not  so  easy  to  answer  the  question  whether  the 


ESCHATOLOGICAL  TEACHING  245 

duration  of  the  Kingdom  was  regarded  by  Jesus  as 
eternal  or  temporary,  or  what  position  in  relation  to  it 
He  assigned  to  the  Final  Judgement  Day.  It  has  been 
held  that  He  identified  the  Fall  of  Jerusalem  with  the 
end  of  the  world,  and  taught  that  this  would  be  the 
*  Day  of  the  Lord ' ;  and  it  has  been  urged  that  this  was 
why  the  early  Christians  expected  His  return  within 
their  own  lifetime.  In  that  case  it  must  be  acknow- 
ledged that  both  He  and  they  were  mistaken.  But  a 
close  consideration  of  His  words  as  handed  down  to  us 
by  those  same  early  Christians, — not  without  some  con- 
fusion perhaps, — tends  to  throw  doubt  upon  such  a 
conclusion. 

Most  of  the  confusion  which  has  arisen  in  relation  to 
this  subject  seems  to  be  due  (1)  to  the  assumption  that 
whenever  Jesus  spoke  of  the  'coming  of  the  Son  of 
Man '  or  the  *  coming  of  the  Kingdom '  He  referred  to 
one  and  the  same  event, — the  Final  Judgement ;  and 
(2)  to  failure  to  recognize  that  much  teaching  which  is 
placed  in  juxtaposition  by  the  Evangelists  may  well 
have  been  spoken  on  different  occasions  and  in  different 
connexions.  It  has  been  seen  that  His  contemporaries 
recognized  a  judgement  at  the  end  of  the  present  age 
upon  the  enemies  of  the  Messiah,  distinct  from  the  Final 
Judgement.  So  in  the  teaching  of  Jesus,  when  He  says 
that  the  Son  of  Man  will  *  come '  (to  judge)  we  need  not 
suppose  that  He  alluded  to  the  Final  Judgement  always, 
but  must  interpret  the  word  '  come '  in  relation  to  the 
circumstances  under  which  such  words  were  uttered  and 
the  various  people  to  whom  they  were  addressed.  It  is 
by  no  means  always  possible  to  ascertain  of  whom  His 
audience  was  composed  or  what  the  circumstances  were, 
but  certain  general  distinctions  in  His  use  of  the  term 
'  come  '  may  be  laid  down. 


246     OUTLINES  OF  THE  SYNOPTIC  RECORD 

(1)  He  alludes  to  a  'coming'  of  the  Kingdom  as 
already  accomplished,  as  when  He  says,  '  The  Kingdom 
of  God  is  among  you.' 

(2)  In  addressing  or  alluding  to  those  who  reject 
Him  and  His  message,  He  speaks  of  a  '  coming  of  the 
Son  of  Man'  to  judgement,  warning  them  of  the  im- 
pending fate  of  Jerusalem  and  the  present  unbelieving 
generation, — the  end  of  the  present  age.  In  the  former 
case  the  coming  was  undemonstrative  and  marked  the 
beginning  of  a  quiet  and  gradual  evolution  :  in  the  latter 
it  was  sudden  and  catastrophic. 

(3)  In  His  teaching  to  the  disciples,  the  expression 
was  indeed  used  in  a  catastrophic  sense,  but  does  not 
seem  to  have  referred  necessarily  to  one  and  the  same 
event, — as  only  to  the  catastrophe  which  was  to  come 
upon  Jerusalem ;  rather,  they  were  to  recognize  His 
'  coming '  in  any  catastrophe  or  crisis,  and  the  greatest 
of  such  crises  would  be  the  Final  Judgement. 

According  to  this  interpretation  the  eschatological 
discourse  contained  in  Mark  has  reference  primarily  to 
the  end  of  '  the  present  age,'  with  which  is  identified 
the  Fall  of  Jerusalem.  In  this  way  many  apparent 
inconsistencies  in  the  teaching  of  Jesus  can  be  explained. 
For  He  speaks  of  the  Kingdom  both  as  present  and 
as  yet  to  come ;  and  the  saying,  '  This  generation  shall 
not  pass  away  until  all  these  things  have  been  fulfilled,' 
is  apparently  at  variance  with  the  subsequent  utterance, 
'  concerning  that  day  and  hour  knoweth  no  man,'  and 
also  with  the  preceding  utterance,  '  The  good  news  must 
first  be  proclaimed  to  all  the  nations.'  On  this  point, 
therefore,  the  teaching  of  Jesus  seems  to  approximate 
to  the  view  of  the  majority  of  His  contemporaries,  that 
the  end  of  the  present  age  was  not  to  be  followed  imme- 
diately by  the  Final  Judgement. 


ESCHATOLOGICAL  TEACHING  247 

So  too,  perhaps,  in  regard  to  the  doctrine  of  the 
Resurrection,  it  may  be  that  He  inclined  towards  the 
more  prevalent  of  the  two  current  views, — that  only 
the  righteous  are  raised.  He  did  not  necessarily,  how- 
ever, mean  by  resurrection  quite  the  same  thing  as  was 
meant  by  the  Jews.  His  answer  to  the  question  of  Mark  xii. 
the  Sadducees  showed  clearly  that  He  believed  in  some 
kind  of  resurrection.  But  the  argument  is  only  directed 
to  prove  the  immortality  of  the  righteous,  by  reason  of 
their  righteousness.  Nowhere  does  He  draw  any  apoca- 
lyptic picture  of  the  resurrection  of  the  good  and  bad 
alike  at  the  last  day.  The  term  '  resurrection '  seems  to 
be  used  toth  here  and  elsewhere  rather  of  the  state  of 
the  righteous  than  of  the  actual  moment  when  they 
are  raised  (cf.  '  sons  of  the  resurrection  ').  On  the  whole 
it  seems  probable  —  though  no  confident  assertion 
can  be  made  in  view  of  the  small  amount  of  teaching 
on  this  subject  which  has  been  preserved — that  Jesus 
believed  that  at  the  last  day  only  the  righteous  would 
be  raised.  Indeed  in  St.  Luke  (xiv.  14)  we  have  the 
phrase  '  In  the  resurrection  of  the  righteous.' 

It  remains  to  sum  up  the  ethical  import — the  essence,  Ethical 

that  is  to  say — of  Jesus'   eschatological  teaching.     In  SlSnifi- 

J  °  °  cance. 

it  He  lays  down  the  Divine  law  that  sin  must  be  followed 

by  judgement  as  applicable  both  to  the  nation  and  to  the 

individual.     The  nearer  His  ministry  drew  to  its  end — 

particularly  when  He  left  Galilee  and  came  to  Jerusalem 

for  the  last  time — the  more  He  became  overburdened 

with  the  sense  of  the  national  guilt.     And  therefore  His 

teaching   became   on   the   one   hand    more    stern    and 

denunciatory  to  those  who  still  rejected  Him,  and  on 

the  other  hand  more  full  of  earnest  warning  and  counsel 

to  His  disciples,  whom  He  was  soon  to  leave,  and  who 

now,  as  never  before,  stood  in  need  of  the  exhortation 


248     OUTLINES  OF  THE  SYNOPTIC  RECORD 

to  be  wakeful,  prudent,  and  faithful  to  their  trust.  It 
was  not  for  them  to  ascertain  the  times  or  seasons 
appointed  b}T  the  Father's  decree,  but,  endued  with 
Divine  power,  to  be  His  witnesses  in  Jerusalem  and  all 
Judaea  and  Samaria  and  to  the  end  of  the  earth. 


CHAPTER  XYI 
THE   PASSION 

The  Last  Supper. — Institution  of  the  Eucharist. —  Gethsemane. 
—  The  Arrest  of  Jesus.  —  The  Trials. —  Peter's  Denial. — 
The  Crucifixion. — The  Burial. 

Mark  xiv.  12-72,  xv;  Matthew  xxvi.  17-75,  xxvii;  Luke 
xxii.  7-71,  xxiii;  John  xiii.  1-30,  36-38,  xviii,  xix. 

The  circumstances  of  the  closing  scenes,  and  of  the  Fulness 

death  of  Jesus,  are  related  in  all  our  authorities  with  ?f the 
'  #  Narra- 

a  fulness  and  circumstantiality  of  detail  which  stand  tives. 
in  marked  contrast  to  the  fragmentary  character  of  the 
accounts  of  His  public  work.  Nothing  more  can  be 
attempted  in  this  chapter  than  to  summarize  briefly 
the  chief  events  in  their  order,  discussing  at  somewhat 
greater  length  certain  questions  which  have  been  raised 
in  reference  to  the  history  and  chronology.  It  would 
seem  likely  that  from  the  first  there  existed  in  Church 
tradition  full  and  detailed  accounts  of  the  Crucifixion. 

In  regard  to  the  course  of  events,  the  Fourth  Gospel  The 
helps  to  explain  some  points  in  the  Synoptic  record.  Sources- 
The  Marcan  outline  appears  here  to  be  by  no  means 
solely  dependent  on  the  Petrine  reminiscences.  St.  Luke's 
account,  again,  is  specially  full  and  detailed,  the  Evan- 
gelist clearly  having  had  access  in  this  portion  of  his 
narrative  to  good  and  independent  sources  of  information. 


250    OUTLINES  OF  THE  SYNOPTIC  RECORD 


Prepara- 
tion for 
the  Last 
Sapper. 
Mark  xiv. 
12-16. 
Mattxxvi, 
17-19. 
Luke  xxii. 
7-13. 


The  Last 
Supper. 


Dispute 
as  to  Pre- 
cedence. 
Luke  xxii. 
24-30. 

The  Feet- 
Washing. 
John  xiii. 
1-17. 


The  Synoptists  relate  that  on  the  first  day1  of  un- 
leavened bread,  the  disciples  asked  Jesus  where  they 
should  prepare  for  them  to  eat  the  Passover.  Jesus 
thereupon  sent  Peter  and  John,  telling  them  that  on 
entering  the  city  they  should  meet  a  man  bearing 
a  pitcher  of  water,  who  would  show  them  an  upper 
room  ready  prepared,  so  that  they  would  only  need 
to  complete  the  preparations  for  the  meal.  The  man 
was,  no  doubt,  a  disciple,  who  by  prearrangement  with 
Jesus  had  engaged  to  prepare  a  room  for  the  reception 
of  the  little  company. 

The  much-debated  question,  whether  the  following 
meal  was  actually  a  Passover,  must  be  reserved  for 
separate  discussion.  Clearly,  the  incidents  of  this  last 
meal  with  their  Master  made  a  deep  impression  on  the 
minds  of  the  disciples.  The  actual  order  of  the  events 
must  indeed  be  largely  conjectural.  St.  Paul's  account 
in  1  Corinthians  seems  to  show  that  the  institution  of 
the  Eucharist  took  place  after  the  meal.  The  dispute 
among  the  disciples,  mentioned  here  by  St.  Luke,  may 
possibly  have  been  caused  by  a  contest  with  regard 
to  precedence  as  they  were  taking  their  places  at  the 
table.  In  that  case  it  is  natural  to  connect  it  with 
the  incident  of  the  feet-washing,  recorded  by  St.  John, 
which  took  place  during  the  meal.  By  thus  performing 
for  His  followers  the  menial  act,  which  was  the  usual 
duty  of  a  slave,  our  Lord  rebuked  more  forcibly  than 
by  any  words  such  unworthy  rivalries,  and  taught  them 
the  lesson  of  true  humility. 


Mark  xiv. 

12. 

Luke  xxii. 

7. 


1  The  term  rd  d'fv^a,  meaning  literally  '  the  unleavened  bread ' 
which  was  eaten  throughout  the  Paschal  week,  was  extended  to  be 
used  as  a  name  for  the  Feast  itself.  St.  Mark,  followed  by  St.  Luke, 
explains  '  the  first  day  of  unleavened  bread  '  as  being  the  day  on 
which  the  Paschal  lamb  was  killed.     (See  Additional  Note.) 


THE  PASSION  251 

During  the  meal  Jesus,  as  if  weighed  down  by  the  Prophecy 
presence  of  the  traitor,  again  foretold  His  betrayal  by  trayaL 
one  of  the  Twelve.     The  departure  of  Judas,  mentioned 
hy  St.  John  before  the  last  discourses,  probably  also 
preceded  the  institution  of  the  Eucharist. 

We  cannot  here  enter  into  the  questions  which  have  Institu- 

been  raised  in  recent  years  in  regard  to  the  historical  Eucharist? 

character  of  the  account  of  the  institution  of  the  Eu-  Mark  xiv. 

22_95 
charist.     There  is  some  doubt  as  to  the  true  text  of  the  Matt.ixvi. 

narrative  in  St.  Luke's  Gospel  (see  Professor  Sanday's  26-29. 
article,  Hastings'  B.J).,  vol.  ii.,  for  a  statement  of  the  i7_i9a# 
evidence  on  the  point).  It  seems,  however,  fairly  certain 
that  the  shortest,  i.e.  Western  form  of  the  text,  is  the 
original  one ;  in  that  case  the  actual  words  of  institution, 
'  this  do  in  remembrance  of  Me,'  do  not  occur  in  any  of 
our  Gospels,  but  have  been  introduced  into  St.  Luke's 
narrative  from  the  parallel  account  in  1  Corinthians.  We 
need  not,  for  that  reason,  regard  the  words  of  institution 
as  unhistorical ;  for  we  must  remember  that  the  Pauline  Cf. 
account,  which  contains  them,  is  earlier  than  any  of  io  05  X1' 
our  Gospels  in  their  present  form ;  and  the  observance 
of  the  rite  from  the  first  in  the  Church,  which  is  fully 
attested,  can  hardly  be  explained  apart  from  the  direct 
command  of  Jesus.  It  is  quite  probable  that  even 
before  the  Last  Sui3per  Jesus  had  given  for  His  disciples 
a  peculiar  significance  to  the  breaking  of  bread ;  for  it 
was  in  the  performance  of  this  act  that  He  was  recog- 
nized by  the  two  disciples  at  Emmaus.  Nor  again,  if 
we  accept  as  historical  the  teaching  of  the  discourse  at 
Capernaum  related  in  John  vi,  was  the  idea  of  the 
spiritual  appropriation  of  their  Master's  Person,  'the 
eating  His  flesh  and  drinking  His  blood,'  new  to  the  dis- 
ciples. Hence  they  would  have  found  no  difficulty  in 
recognizing,  in  the  observance  commanded  at  the  Last 


252    OUTLINES  OF  THE  SYNOPTIC  RECORD 

Supper,  a  special  means  whereby  the  spiritual  feeding 
on  the  flesh  and  blood  of  Jesus,  laid  down  in  that  dis- 
course, might  be  realized  by  His  followers.  The  words 
of  Jesus  as  to  the  New  Covenant  instituted  by  the 
shedding  of  His  blood  for  the  remission  of  sins  would 
naturally  connect  themselves  in  their  minds  with  the 
prophecy  of  Jeremiah,  in  regard  to  the  new  inward 
covenant  to  be  made  by  God  with  His  people  ( Jer.  xxxi. 
31-33). 
(i)  Pro-  In  the  subsequent  discourses  Jesus  again  foretold  to 

Desertion  ^ne  Eleven  how,  in  the  approaching  hour  of  peril,  they 
Mark  xiv.  would  all  desert  Him ;  and  when  Peter  loudly  pro- 
Matt,  ixvi  tested  that  he,  at  least,  would  never  be  guilty  of  such 
81,82.  cowardice,  Jesus  replied  by  explicitly  declaring  that 
Denial  of  De^ore  the  cock  should  crow  twice  he  would  thrice 
Peter.         deny  Him. 

29-31 X1V'  At  the  close  of  the  conversation  in  the  upper 
Matt.xxvi.  chamber  Jesus  and  the  Eleven,  having  sung  a  hymn, 
Luke  xx ii  proceeded  to  a  garden  named  Gethsemane,  outside  the 
31-34.  city,  which  may  have  been  His  resort  at  other  times. 
36-38X1U  ^ne  discourses  related  in  the  Fourth  Gospel  seem  to 
have  been  spoken  partly  in  the  upper  room,  partly  in 
the  course  of  the  walk  from  the  city. 
Warning  St.  Luke  at  this  point  inserts  a  fragment  of  discourse, 
Future16  ^he  original  position  of  which  he  apparently  does  not 
Work  know ;  in  this  Jesus  indicates  to  His  disciples  the 
Disciples    cnaracter  of  their  future  work,  contrasting  its  conditions 

Lukexxii.  with  those  of  their  earlier  mission.  Then,  He  reminds 
35-38 

them,  He  had  sent  them  forth  lightly  clad  and  equipped, 

'  without  purse,  and  wallet,  and  shoes,'  leaving  them  to 
be  dependent  on  the  hospitality  of  others ;  yet  they  had 
lacked  nothing.  But  now  they  must  prepare  themselves 
for  a  permanent  work,  taking  purse  and  wallet ;  hence- 
forward, too,  they  must  expect  to  meet  not  a  friendly 


THE  PASSION  253 

reception,  but  rejection  and  persecution.  This  He  en- 
forced by  the  paradoxical  command,  'He  that  hath 
no  sword,  let  him  sell  his  cloke  and  buy  one.'  When 
the  disciples,  taking  His  words  literally,  replied,  'Here 
are  two  swords,'  Jesus,  as  usual,  did  not  stop  at  the 
time  to  enlighten  their  misapprehension,  but  merely  put 
the  subject  aside  with  the  words,  'It  is  enough.'  We 
notice  that  our  Lord's  allusion  here  has  reference  to 
what  is  contained  in  the  instructions  to  the  Seventy 
according  to  St.  Luke,  and  not  in  those  to  the  Twelve;  See  Luke  x. 
this  gives  some  support  to  the  view  that  the  original  * 
tradition  identified  the  two  missions,  or,  at  any  rate, 
that  St.  Luke  has  referred  to  the  sending  of  the  Seventy 
instructions  which  originally  formed  part  of  the  direc- 
tions to  the  Twelve. 

On  reaching  the  Garden  of  Gethsemane  Jesus  took  Getli- 
with  Him  only  the  three  chosen  disciples,  Peter,  James  ^^nei 
and  John,  that  He  might  have   the  support  of   their  32-42. 
presence  in  the  coming  hour  of  spiritual  struggle ;  but  ^at46XXV1' 
even  they,  weighed  down  as  they  were  with  sorrow  and  Luke  xxii. 
foreboding,  proved  unequal  to  sharing  His  vigil,  and  fell  39_4:6- 
asleep.    During  these  last  moments  of  freedom  Jesus  by 
repeated  prayer  of  intense  earnestness  schooled  Himself 
to  meet  with   resignation   the  coming   trial.     He   first 
besought  the  Father  to  remove  from  Him,  if  it  were 
possible,    the    cup    of    anguish,    but    ended    with    the 
expression  of  absolute  submission  to  His  Will, '  Howbeit 
not  what  I  will,  but  what  Thou  wilt.'    How  fully  He 
attained  to  this  spirit  of  complete  submission  was  shown 
by   the   words   in   which,    according    to   St.  John,   He 
checked  Peter's  rash  attempt  to  defend  Him  by  force 
at  His  arrest:    'Put  up   the   sword   into   the   sheath :  John  xviii. 
the  cup  which  the  Father  hath  given  Me,  shall  I  not 
drink  it  ? '    The  narrative  of  the  bloody  sweat  and  the 


254    OUTLINES  OF  THE  SYNOPTIC  RECORD 

appearance  of  the  angel  is  a  later  insertion  in  St.  Luke's 

Gospel,  due  probably  to  tradition,  either  written  or  oral. 

The  At  least  an  hour  must  have  been  spent  in  the  garden. 

Markxiv    JU(ias  meanwhile,  who  knew  the  place  as  a    resort  of 

43-51.         Jesus,  had  gathered  an  armed  band  of  men  and  soldiers 

47^gXXV1'  from  the  Chief  Priests,  and  conducted  them  to  the  spot, 

Lukexxi.    just   as  Jesus   rose   to    depart.      In    quick   succession 

Cf     '        followed  the   betrayal,    the  vain   attempt   of   Peter   at 

Johnxviii.  resistance,  the  healing  of   the   severed  ear  of  the  High 

Priest's  servant  by  the  touch  of  Jesus,  the  arrest  and 

the   scattering  of   the  disciples.    The  whole   doubtless 

occupied  but  a  few  minutes.     The  subsequent  events  to 

the  final  sentence  of  Pilate  crowd  rapidly  on  one  another. 

St.  John's  narrative,  however,  enables  us  to  determine 

with  some  degree  of  certainty  the  course  of  procedure. 

The  aim  of  the  hierarchy  clearly  was  to  carry  through 
the  preliminaries  with  all  speed,  and  hand  over  their 
prisoner  to  the  Roman  authorities  before  the  news  of 
His  arrest  could  get  abroad  among  the  populace. 
Jewish  (a)   St.  John   relates  that    Jesus   was   first   brought 

ria  '         before  Annas,  the  father-in-law  of  Caiaphas,  for  a  sort 
Annas.       °f   preliminary  investigation;    at  this  interview  it  was 
Johnxviii.  sought  to  extort  from  Him   some  compromising  con- 
fession, on  which   a    charge   of    implication    in   secret 
conspiracy    might    be    based.      He,    however,    simply 
pointed  to  the  manner  of  His  teaching,  in  which  there 
had  been  no  secrecy  or  concealment.    Thus  the  attempt 
to  incriminate  Him  from  His  own  lips  clearly  ended  in 
complete  failure. 
(&)  Before       (b)  Meanwhile,  the  Sanhedrin  had  been  hastily  sum- 
meeting^    moned  to  the  High  Priest's  palace.     Jesus  was  now  led 


of  San-  from  Annas  to  be  brought  before  it  for  formal  trial. 
Mark^iv  Res°lve(l  as  the  judges  of  Jesus  were  on  His  condemna- 
53-65.        tion,  some  evidence  had  to  be  produced  to  give  a  colour 


THE  PASSION  255 

of  legality  to  their  proceedings.  It  would  seem  that,  Matt.xxvi. 
from  lack  of  other  material  for  accusation,  it  was  sought 
to  establish  a  charge  of  blasphemy  on  the  ground  of 
His  words  as  to  the  temple,  spoken  at  the  cleansing 
two  years  before.  When,  however,  the  disagreement  of 
the  witnesses  made  their  evidence  too  palpably  value- 
less, the  High  Priest  had  recourse  to  a  direct  appeal. 
Addressing  Jesus,  he  solemnly  adjured  Him  to  tell  them 
whether  He  was  indeed  '  the  Messiah,  the  Son  of  the 
Blessed.'  The  words  of  the  question  suggested  that 
such  was  indeed  the  claim  made  by  Jesus,  'Thou  art 
then  (a-v  el)  the  Messiah  % '  This  direct  appeal  Jesus 
would  not  leave  unanswered.  Never  yet  had  He  openly 
proclaimed  Himself  as  the  Messiah ;  but  now  He  knew 
the  time  for  concealment  to  be  past :  '  I  am,'  He  replied  l, 
'and  ye  shall  see  the  Son  of  Man  sitting  at  the  right 
hand  of  power,  and  coming  with  the  clouds  of  heaven.' 
Thus  at  last  His  own  confession  gave  the  council  the 
ground  of  condemnation  which  they  had  sought  in  vain 
to  obtain  from  others.  Exclaiming  in  affected  indigna- 
tion at  such  blasphemy,  they  unanimously  passed  on  him 
sentence  of  death. 

A  question  has  been  raised  as  to  wherein  the  blasphemy 
of  Jesus'  utterance  consisted.  Was  it  looked  on  as  an 
assertion  of  full  Divinity  ?  It  is  generally  agreed  now 
that  the  words  were  regarded  only  as  a  claim  to 
Messiahship ;  yet  doubtless  they  held  this  claim  to  be 
the  Messiah  put  forward  by  an  upstart  teacher,  to  whom 
the  national  leaders  had  refused  recognition,  combined 
as  it  was  with  the  prediction  that  He  should  return  as 

1  The  words  av  eliras  (Matt.)  or  av  \eyeis  (Luke),  though  in  them- 
selves ambiguous,  are  here  clearly  to  be  taken  in  an  affirmative 
sense,  being  used  as  equivalent  to  the  direct  statement  in  St.  Mark, 
'  I  am  *  CE7W  dfu). 


256     OUTLINES  OF  THE  SYNOPTIC  RECORD 

Judge  invested  with  Divine  powers,  to  be  in  truth 
nothing  short  of  blasphemy, 
(c)  Formal  (c)  St.  Luke  places  the  trial  before  the  Sanhedrin  in 
of  San-"  the  eariV  morning.  This  may  refer  to  a  subsequent 
hedrin  in  assembly  held  at  daybreak,  in  accordance  with  the  re- 
Luke  xxi'i.  quirements  of  the  law,  for  passing  formal  sentence. 
66-71.  gt.  Luke,  who  relates  only  this  formal  trial,  has  probably 
referred  to  it  the  incidents  of  the  earlier  informal  meeting. 
Peter's  Meanwhile,  Peter  had  accompanied  John   into   the 

M^rkxiv.  outer  court  of  the  High  Priest's  house.     Mingling  with 
66-72.         the  servants  gathered  there,  he  waited,  in  St.  Matthew's 
69-75.      '  pregnant  phrase,   '  to  see  the   end ' ;    the  story  of  his 
Luke  xxii.  threefold  denial  is  related  by  all  the  Evangelists.     All 
Johnxviii.  ^our  accounts,  while  they  record  the  circumstances  with 
15-18,        variations  of  detail,  agree  as  to  the  growing  confidence 
with  which  the  charge  was  brought  and  the  increasing 
vigour  of  the  Apostle's  denial.     It  was  only,  as  St.  Mark 
relates,  when  he  heard  the  second  cock-crow,  and  looking 
up  found  his  Master's  gaze  fixed  upon  him,  that  he  awoke 
to  the  meaning  of  his  act  and  rushed  out  into  the  night 
to  weep  bitterly  over  his  failure. 
Roman  In  the  early  hours  of  the  morning  the  Chief  Priests 

Before  ^  Jesus  before  Pilate,  the  Roman  procurator,  in  order 
Pilate.  to  obtain  from  him  the  confirmation  and  execution  of 
2-15.  ^  their  sentence.  The  struggle  which  ensues  is  vividly 
Matt.  depicted  in  the  Gospel  narrative.      On  the  one  hand 

11-26.  '    '  ^ne  Chief  Priests,  firmly  resolved  on  the  death  of  their 

Lukexxiii.  victim,  put  forward  one  charge  after  another  in  their 

1-25 

Johnxviii.  feverish  anxiety  to  wrest  sentence  from   the  reluctant 

28-xix.  16.  Governor ;   on  the  other  hand  Pilate,  divided  between 

contempt  and  fear  of  the  Jews,  shows  himself  from  the 

first  anxious  to  be  rid  of  the  case,  and  seeks  by  various 

expedients  to  escape  from  the  dilemma  in  which  he  is 

placed.     Forced  at  last  to  give  way,  he  would  disclaim 


THE  PASSION  257 

responsibility  for  his  share  of  the  judicial  murder,  while 
with  the  obstinacy  of  a  weak  man  he  adheres  to  the 
last  to  the  title  placed  on  the  Cross  in  face  of  the 
protests  of  the  Jews. 

The  Chief  Priests  hoped  probably  to  obtain  forth- 
with confirmation  of  their  sentence.  If  such  was  their 
expectation  they  were  soon  undeceived.  Pilate  first 
demanded  the  ground  of  their  accusation ;  and  refusing 
to  accept  the  vague  statement  that  they  would  not 
have  brought  Him,  were  He  not  an  evil-doer,  bade  them 
take  their  prisoner  and  judge  Him  themselves.  There- 
upon, they  put  forward  a  political  charge  under  three 
heads.  '  We  found  this  man  perverting  our  nation,  and 
forbidding  to  give  tribute  to  Caesar,  saying  that  He 
Himself  is  Christ  a  King.'  A  private  examination  of 
Jesus  soon  convinced  Pilate  that  He  was  in  fact  no 
political  intriguer ;  the  Chief  Priests,  however,  continued 
to  urge  their  accusation  with  increased  vehemence : 
'  He  stirreth  up  the  people,  teaching  throughout  all 
Judaea,  and  beginning  from  Galilee  even  unto  this 
place.'  The  mention  of  Galilee  suggested  to  Pilate 
the  expedient  of  transferring  the  case  to  Herod,  who 
was   then   at  Jerusalem  for  the  Feast.     He   hoped  in  Before 

this  way  to  free  himself  from  an  embarrassing  decision,  perod-  ... 

&  '  Lukexxm. 

and  at  the  same  time  conciliate  by  such  a  show  of  6-12. 
courtesy  the  tetrarch.  Yet  Herod,  glad  enough  to 
satisfy  his  curiosity  to  see  Jesus,  had  doubtless  no 
wish  to  take  off  the  shoulders  of  the  procurator  an 
awkward  responsibility.  Despite  the  vehemence  of  the 
charges  of  the  Chief  Priests  he  and  his  soldiers  merely 
made  their  prisoner  an  object  of  their  coarse  derision, 
and  sent  Him  back  gorgeously  arrayed  in  mockery  of 
His  supposed  claims  to  royalty.  Pilate  thereupon  again 
proposed  to  the  Jewish  leaders  that  he  should  release 

s 


258     OUTLINES  OF  THE  SYNOPTIC  RECORD 

Jesus.  A  means  of  doing  this,  without  definitely  com- 
mitting himself  to  a  sentence  of  acquittal,  seemed  to 
be  afforded  by  the  customary  privilege,  whereby  at 
the  time  of  the  Feast  the  release  of  one  prisoner  was 
granted  to  the  people.  Yet  here  again  his  purpose 
was  thwarted  by  the  populace,  who,  at  the  instigation  of 
the  Chief  Priests,  clamoured  for  the  release  of  a  political 
prisoner,  named  Barabbas.  Pilate  now  ordered  Jesus 
to  be  scourged,  and  then  led  Him  out  before  them, 
wearing  the  crown  of  thorns  and  the  purple  robe,  which 
had  been  placed  upon  Him  by  the  Roman  soldiers,  and 
presented  Him  to  the  people  with  the  words,  'Behold, 
the  Man ! '  He  hoped  probably  that  the  pity  of  the 
mob  might  be  aroused  by  the  sight,  and  that  they 
might  be  content  with  the  lesser  penalty.  The  Chief 
Priests,  however,  the  political  charge  having  proved 
ineffectual,  now  took  up  new  ground,  declaring  to  Pilate, 
'We  have  a  law,  and  by  that  law  He  ought  to  die, 
because  He  made  Himself  the  Son  of  God.'  Yet  the 
effect  of  this  declaration  was  only  to  arouse  new  fears 
in  the  superstitious  mind  of  the  Governor,  and  to  increase 
his  anxiety  to  release  a  prisoner,  who  already,  it  is  clear, 
inspired  him  with  mysterious  awe.  St.  Matthew  relates 
that  additional  ground  was  given  to  his  superstitious 
fears  by  a  message  from  his  wife,  warning  him  to  have 
nothing  to  do  with  '  that  righteous  man ' ;  since  she 
had  '  suffered  many  things  that  day  in  a  dream  because 
of  Him.' 

Yet  the  accusers  of  Jesus  had  still  one  last  arrow  in 
reserve:  they  threatened  Pilate  with  a  charge  of  dis- 
loyalty against  Caesar.  This  threat  broke  down  the 
resistance  of  Pilate,  conscious,  as  he  was,  of  his  own 
unpopularity,  and  dreading  the  effect  of  such  a  charge 
on  the  mind  of  the  suspicious  Tiberius.     Once   more, 


THE  PASSION  259 

as  a  further  expression  of  his  contempt  for  the  subjects 
whom  he  hated,  he  led  Jesus  out  before  them,  and 
exclaimed,  '  Behold,  your  King  ! '  The  sight,  however, 
only  increased  the  exasperation  of  the  Chief  Priests, 
and  led  to  more  vehement  demands  for  His  crucifixion. 
To  Pilate's  ironical  question,  '  Shall  I  crucify  your  King  ?' 
they  replied,  '  We  have  no  king  but  Caesar.'  Only  then 
did  Pilate  at  last  give  way  and  pass  sentence  of  death 
by  crucifixion.  Thus,  too  weak  to  make  a  stand  at  the 
first,  he  was  forced  at  last  to  yield  to  the  rancour  of 
the  Jewish  hierarchy.  St.  Matthew  records  that  when 
Pilate,  by  the  act  of  hand-washing,  publicly  disclaimed 
for  himself  the  guilt  of  'the  blood  of  this  righteous 
man,'  all  the  people  (vm?  6  Aao?)  cried  in  a  sentence  of 
unconscious  irony,  'His  blood  be  on  us  and  on  our 
children.' 

There  is  no  need  to  dwell  on  the  familiar  details  of  Cruci- 
the  mockery  of  Jesus  which  followed,  and  the  Cruci- ^^ and 
fixion,  or  to  discuss  the  sayings  from  the  Cross.     One  Mark  xv. 

utterance,  however,  of  our  Lord  on  the  road  to  Calvary  ?J~.t       •• 

'  '  J  Matt,  xxvi  i. 

needs  a  few  words  of  comment.    As  He  went,  a  number  32-56. 
of  women  and  others  from  the  city  followed  Him  weep-  J^^*111' 
ing.     Jesus  turning  to  them  bade  them  weep  not  for  John  xix. 
Him,  but  for  themselves  and  for  their  children,  for  soon,  17~37- 

Words 

He  declared,  the  days  would  come  when  childlessness  to  the 
should  be  considered  a  blessing,  when  they  should  begin,  Women. 
in   the  words   of   the  prophet   Hosea,  '  to  say  to   the  27-31. 
mountains,  Fall  on  us  ;  and  to  the  hills,  Cover  us.    For,' 
He  adds,  'if  they  do  these  things  in  the  green  tree, 
what  shall  be  done  in  the  dry  ? '     The  last  saying  would 
appear  to  be  proverbial ;  if  this  is  the  fate  of  the  green 
shoot,  what  shall  befall  the  dry  lifeless  stump  ?  if,  that 
is,   the  Romans  deal  thus  with   the   upright   and  the 
innocent,  what  fate  has  God  in  store  for  the  Jewish 

S  2 


260    OUTLINES  OF  THE  SYNOPTIC  RECORD 

nation,    which    has    proved    itself    thus    callous    and 
rebellious  ? 

There  is  an  apparent  discrepancy  in  our  records  as  to 
the  hour  of  the  Crucifixion ;  this  point  we  have  discussed 
elsewhere l.  The  Evangelists  tell  of  various  signs  which 
accompanied  the  death  of  Jesus.  A  mysterious  dark- 
ness overspread  the  earth,  while  the  veil  of  the  temple 
was  rent  from  top  to  bottom.  They  relate,  too,  the 
impression  made  by  the  scene  on  many  of  the  beholders. 
Most  marked  was  this  in  the  case  of  the  centurion  on 
duty  at  the  Cross.  The  words  of  his  exclamation  are 
differently  given  by  our  accounts,  '  Truly  this  man  was 
the  Son  of  God'  (St.  Matthew  and  St.  Mark),  or 
'  Certainly  this  was  a  righteous  man '  (St.  Luke).  Which- 
ever version  we  accept,  the  words  at  least  imply  that 
there  had  arisen  in  his  mind  'an  undefined  feeling  of 
awe  and  a  consciousness  that  events  were  happening 
that  transcended  his  experience  and  apprehension ' 2. 
Pilate,  at  the  request  of  the  Chief  Priests,  ordered  the 
bodies  to  be  taken  down  before  sunset,  which  would  be 
the  beginning  of  the  Sabbath,  coinciding  in  this  case 
with  the  opening  of  the  Feast. 
The  Two  of  the  wealthier  Jewish  disciples  of  Jesus,  Joseph 

Mark  xv  °*  Arimathaea  and  Nicodemus,  both  members  of  the 
42-47.  Sanhedrin,  received  permission  from  Pilate  to  perform 
Mattsvii.  the  lagt  riteg  for  the  body  of  their  Master      The  time 

Lukexxiii.  for  the  burial  being  limited,  Joseph  laid  the  corpse  in 
5  '  a  new  tomb  in  his  own  garden.  All  our  accounts 
represent  the  burial  as  being  carried  out  in  haste  owing 
to  the  approach  of  the  Sabbath.  St.  Matthew  alone 
mentions  the  further  application  of  the  Chief  Priests  to 
Pilate,  the  setting  of  a  watch  of  soldiers  at  the  tomb, 


See  Additional  Note.  2  Sanday. 


THE  PASSION  261 

and  the  sealing  of  the  stone.  The  attendant  women 
from  Galilee  marked  the  place  of  burial  of  their  Master, 
and  prepared  spices,  which  they  intended  to  carry  to 
the  tomb  as  soon  as  the  Sabbath  was  closed. 


ADDITIONAL  NOTE   ON   THE  CHEONOLOGY 
OF  THE   PASSION. 

Several  difficulties  meet  us  in  regard  to  the  chronology 
of  the  Passion.  These  concern  (i)  the  day  of  the  month, 
(ii)  the  day  of  the  week,  (hi)  the  hour  of  the  day,  at 
which  the  Crucifixion  took  place.  A  full  discussion 
on  these  points  will  be  found  in  any  modern  work  on 
the  Gospels.  Mr.  Wright's  article  ('New  Testament 
Problems ')  on  '  The  Date  of  the  Crucifixion '  gives  the 
clearest  and  most  satisfactory  statement  of  the  evidence. 
Here  nothing  more  can  be  attempted  than  a  brief 
summary  of  the  points  at  issue. 


I.    The  Day  of  the  Month. 

Did  the  Crucifixion  take  place  on  the  14th  or  15th 
of  the  Jewish  month  Nisan  ?  The  Paschal  Lamb  was 
slain  on  Nisan  14  and  eaten  on  the  evening  of  that  day, 
i.e.  the  beginning  of  Nisan  15,  according  to  Jewish 
reckoning  from  sunset  to  sunset.  Thus,  if  the  Last 
Supper  was  indeed  the  Paschal  meal,  it  took  place  on 
the  evening  of  Nisan  14,  and  the  Crucifixion  must  in 
that  case  be  placed  on  Nisan  15.  If,  on  the  other  hand, 
the  Feast  began  on  the  evening  of  the  day  of  the 
Crucifixion,  that  day  must  have  been  Nisan  14,  and 
the  Last  Supper  cannot  then  be  identified  with  the 
Paschal  meal  eaten  on  the  evening  of  that  day.  From 
a  comparison  of  the  Gospels  it  would  appear  that  the 
Synoptists  support  the  former,  St.  John  the  latter  view. 
The  evidence  on  the  point  is  briefly  as  follows : — 


262    OUTLINES  OF  THE  SYNOPTIC  RECORD 


Evidence 
as  to  the 
Day. 


Evidence 
of  the 
Fourth 
Gospel. 


Evidence 
of  the  Sy- 
noptists. 


All  four  Evangelists  agree  in  calling  the  day  of  the 
Crucifixion  Hapao-Ktvij.  This  was  the  usual  term  for 
Friday,  the  preparation  for  the  weekly  Sabbath.  There 
is  no  evidence  that  the  Jews  of  our  Lord's  day  could  have 
applied  the  term  to  any  day  except  Friday.  St.  John's 
expression  indeed  (xix.  31),  '  For  the  day  of  that  sabbath 
was  a  high  day,'  certainly  finds  its  most  natural  ex- 
planation if  the  weekly  Sabbath  in  that  year  corresponded 
with  the  first  day  of  the  Feast,  as  in  fact  by  his  account 
was  the  case.  But  except  as  to  the  name  of  the  day, 
the  two  accounts  seem  to  be  in  direct  conflict.  It  will 
be  well  to  consider  each  separately. 

1.  St.  John  clearly  states  that  the  Crucifixion  took 
place  on  the  day  preceding  the  Passover. 

xiii.  1.  'Before  the  Feast  of  the  Passover'  Jesus  and 
His  disciples  assemble  for  the  Last  Supper. 

xviii.  28.  The  chief  priests  refuse  to  enter  Pilate's 
judgement  hall,  'that  they  might  not  be  defiled,  but 
might  eat  the  Passover.' 

xix.  14.  '  Now  it  was  the  preparation  of  the  Passover  : 
it  was  about  the  sixth  hour '  when  Pilate  led  Jesus  out 
to  the  judgement  seat. 

All  incidental  indications  in  his  Gospel  are  consistent 
with  this  view.  Thus  Judas  was  thought  to  have  been 
sent  out  from  the  supper-room  to  make  purchases  for 
the  Feast  (xiii.  29),  whereas  on  the  evening  of  the  Feast- 
day  no  shops  would  have  been  open ;  while  throughout 
the  trials  there  is  no  indication  to  suggest  that  the  day 
had  the  sanctity  of  a  feast-day. 

2.  The  Synoptists,  on  the  other  hand,  representing 
undoubtedly  the  Marcan  tradition,  clearly  state  that 
the  Last  Supper  was  the  Paschal  meal : 

Mark  xiv.  12.  'On  the  first  day  of  unleavened  bread, 
when  they  sacrificed  the  Passover,  His  disciples  say 
unto  Him,  Where  wilt  Thou  that  we  go  and  make 
ready  that  Thou  may  est  eat  the  Passover  \ ' 
xiv.  16.  '  They  make  ready  the  Passover.' 
Both  the  above  passages  clearly  belong  to  the  Marcan 
tradition,  and  are  not  subsequent  additions.  Again, 
in  Luke  xxii.  15,  Jesus  says  to  His  disciples,  '  With 
desire  I  have  desired  to  eat  this  Passover  with  you.' 


THE  PASSION  263 

We  are  left  then  to  choose  between  two  conflicting 
views. 

Now  in  reaching  a  decision  one  or  two  preliminary  Pre- 
considerations  naturally  suggest  themselves  :  liminary 

In  the  first  place  it  is  hard  to  suppose  that  a  disciple  j££s!  * 
of  Jesus  could  have  been  mistaken  on  such  a  point  as 
this,  while  on  the  other  hand  a  later  writer,  using  second- 
hand information,  might  well  have  been  led  into  error. 
It  is  clear  also  that  the  author  of  our  Fourth  Gospel, 
having  the  Synoptists  before  him,  must  have  deliberately 
altered  their  account.  Yet  it  is  hard  to  see  what  object 
he  could  have  had  in  doing  so,  unless  he  had  reason  to 
consider  their  chronology  incorrect.  Thus  a  priori  con- 
siderations would  incline  us  to  prefer  the  evidence  of 
the  Fourth  Gospel. 

When  we  turn  to  a  closer  consideration  of  the  external  Traces 
and  internal  evidence,  these  are  found  to  point  decidedly  i?tSy^op" 
to  the  same  conclusion.  another 

1.  While  the  Johannine  account  is  consistent  through-  Tradition. 
out,  the  Synoptists  gave  various  traces  of  the  existence 

of  another  different  tradition,  implying  that  the  day  of 
the  Crucifixion  was  not  a  feast-day.  Thus,  it  is  stated 
(Mark  xiv.  2)  that  the  Chief  Priests  had  decided  to 
avoid  the  arrest  of  Jesus  during  the  Feast,  for  fear  of 
a  popular  tumult.  It  has,  indeed,  been  suggested  that 
the  treachery  of  Judas  caused  them  to  alter  their  plans, 
by  enabling  them  to  effect  the  arrest  in  secret.  Again, 
according  to  the  Marcan  tradition,  Jesus  and  His 
disciples  leave  the  city,  and  armed  men  are  sent  to  seize 
Him,  both  of  which  would  be  impossible  on  a  feast-day. 
Again,  the  Sanhedrin  could  not  have  met  for  the  trial 
of  Jesus  on  the  Feast-day. 

Thus  these  internal  contradictions  tend  to  discredit 
the  Marcan  tradition. 

2.  St.  PauVs  references  to  Christ  as  the  Paschal  Lamb  Evidence 
(1  Cor.  v.  7,  &c.)   seem  to  imply  that  the  Crucifixion  of  St.  Paul 
coincided  with  the  slaying  of  the  Paschal  Lamb,  which 

took  place  on  Nisan  14 ;  while  we  notice  that  he  does 
not  in  1  Corinthians  speak  of  the  Last  Supper  as  a 
Passover.  and  of 

3.  Early  Christian  Tradition  also  favours  the  Johannine  Early 


264    OUTLINES  OF  THE  SYNOPTIC  RECORD 


Christian 
Tradition. 


Suggested 
Explana- 
tions. 


General 
Conclu- 
sion. 


account,  placing  the  Crucifixion  on  Nisan  14.  and  dis- 
tinguishing the  Last  Supper  from  the  Passover.  (See 
Bishop  Westcott's  Introduction  to  the  Study  of  the  Gospels 
for  a  statement  of  the  evidence.) 

Various  expedients  have  been  resorted  to  by  harmo- 
nists to  remove  the  disagreement,  but  they  are  generally 
wanting  alike  in  evidence  and  plausibility.  Explana- 
tions usually  proposed  are — 

(i)  That  the  Chief  Priests  in  their  anxiety  to  obtain 
the  condemnation  of  Jesus  postponed  eating  the  Pass- 
over till  the  evening  of  Nisan  15.  Of  this,  however, 
there  is  no  hint  in  the  Synoptic  narrative,  and  it  is  in 
direct  contradiction  to  the  statements  of  St.  John. 

(ii)  It  has  been  also  suggested  that  by  'eating  the 
Passover '  St.  John  means  not  the  Passover  proper, 
but  a  festal  meal  called  the  Chagigah,  which  was  eaten 
on  one  of  the  days  of  the  Feast.  This  view  Dr.  Sanday 
now  '  believes  to  be  untenable.'  Mr  Wright  has  shown 
that  there  is  no  evidence  that  the  Chagigah  existed  at 
that  time,  and  that  no  ancient  authors  suggest  that 
1  eating  the  Passover '  in  St.  John  meant  something  quite 
different  from  *  eating  the  Passover '  in  St.  Mark. 

(hi)  Another  explanation,  hinted  at  by  Dr.  Sanday, 
that  our  Lord  and  His  disciples  anticipated  the  Passover, 
has  more  to  recommend  it.  It  would  be  rendered  still 
more  probable  were  any  evidence  forthcoming  that  the 
Paschal  meal  was  in  some  cases  eaten  on  the  preceding 
evening.  The  chief  objection  to  it  is  that  there  are  no 
traces  of  the  characteristic  observances  of  the  Paschal 
meal  in  our  accounts  of  the  Last  Supper. 

(iv)  Mr.  Wright  would  refer  the  Institution  of  the 
Eucharist  and  other  points,  in  our  accounts  of  the  Last 
Supper,  to  an  earlier  Paschal  meal  of  our  Lord  and  His 
disciples,  supposing  that  the  Marcan  tradition  has  con- 
fused the  two  occasions. 

On  the  whole,  the  only  conclusion  which  we  can  form 
from  the  evidence  at  present  forthcoming  is  that  the 
Fourth  Gospel  appears  to  be  correct  in  representing  the 
Last  Supper  as  being  not  the  Passover,  but  a  meal  eaten 
on  the  evening  preceding  Nisan  14,  and  that  the  tradi- 
tion preserved  in  the  Marcan  outline  identifying  the 


THE  PASSION  265 

Last  Supper  with  the  Paschal  meal  was  probably  due 
to  a  misunderstanding,  the  origin  of  which  we  cannot 
now  trace. 

II.    The  Day  of  the  Week. 

Bishop  Westcott  has  suggested  {Introduction  to  the  Study 
of  the  Gospels,  p.  348)  that  the  Crucifixion  took  place  on 
Thursday  and  not  Friday ;  but  his  view  on  this  point 
has  found  no  support.  The  interval  between  the  Cruci- 
fixion and  Resurrection  is  generally  described  in  the 
Gospels  by  the  phrases  rfj  Tpirrj  rjfxepa,  on  the  third  day 
(8  times),  //.era  Tpets  rjfjiepas  after  three  days  (4  times). 
The  latter  phrase,  which  is  that  which  occurs  invariably 
in  St.  Mark,  is  without  doubt  the  more  original ;  but  it 
would  appear  certain  that,  according  to  ancient  usage, 
it  must  bear  the  meaning  of  '  the  next  day  but  one.' 
It  has  been  already  shown  that  the  term  -Trapaa-Kevrj, 
which  is  applied  in  all  four  Gospels  to  the  day  of 
Crucifixion,  can  only  naturally  mean  Friday,  the  Pre- 
paration for  the  weekly  Sabbath.  Bishop  Westcott's 
suggestion  is  based  on  the  allusion  in  St.  Matthew  (xii. 
40)  to  the  sign  of  Jonah,  in  which  it  is  stated  that  '  the 
Son  of  Man  shall  be  three  days  and  three  nights  in 
the  heart  of  the  earth.'  But  this  passage  stands  alone, 
and  appears  to  be  no  original  part  of  the  Synoptic 
outline,  but  an  addition  of  the  Evangelist  which  bears 
traces  of  having  been  accommodated  to  the  facts  of  the 
Old  Testament  narrative  (see  above,  p.  180,  note). 

III.    The  Hour  of  the  Day. 

Here  again  we  have  a  direct   conflict  between  the  Diver- 
Marcan   and  Johannine   tradition  as   to    the   hour   at  gence  of 
which  the  Crucifixion  took  place.     A  careful  discussion  M*rcan 
of  the  question  will  be  found  in  Mr.  Wright's  article.  j0hannine 
The  notes  of  time  in  the  two  accounts  are  : —  Account .ssl 

St.  Mark  xv.  1.  'Straightway  in  the  morning  (-n-pwi) 
the  Chief  Priests  .  .  .  held  a  consultation,  and  bound 
Jesus,  and  carried  Him  away,  and  delivered  Him  up  to 
Pilate.' 

xv.  25.  '  And  it  was  the  third  hour,  and  they  crucified 
Him.' 


266     OUTLINES  OF  THE  SYNOPTIC  RECORD 


Har- 

monistic 
Sugges- 
tions. 


St.  John  xviii.  28.  '  They  lead  Jesus  therefore  from 
Caiaphas  into  the  palace  :  and  it  was  early  (tt/xoi).' 

xix.  14.  '  Now  it  was  the  Preparation  of  the  Passover  : 
it  was  about  the  sixth  hour,'  when  Pilate  led  Jesus  forth 
to  the  judgement  seat. 

Thus  we  have  here  a  discrepancy  of  more  than  three 
hours,  since  some  interval  must  be  allowed  between  the 
point  referred  to  in  John  xix.  14  and  the  actual 
Crucifixion. 

Here  again  harmonists  have  found  scope  for  their 
ingenuity. 

1.  It  has  been  said  that  St.  John  reckons  the  hours 
from  midnight,  and  not,  as  in  common  use,  from  sun- 
rise. This  explanation  has  been  shown  to  be  quite 
untenable,  as  (a)  It  was  unknown  to  all  the  ancient 
Fathers,  while  (b)  It  seems  impossible  to  find  time  for 
all  the  events  related  between  the  meeting  of  the 
Sanhedrin  at  daybreak  and  Pilate's  final  sentence  to 
take  place  before  6  a.  m.  (c)  But  further  there  is  no 
sufficient  evidence  of  the  existence  of  any  such  reckoning 
of  the  hours  in  ancient  times  as  that  here  suggested. 

2.  Professor  Ramsay  seeks  a  solution  of  the  difficulty 
on  other  lines ;  he  argues  that  the  ancients  did  not 
reckon  hours  with  modern  accuracy,  and  hence  if  the 
Crucifixion  took  place  at  10.30  a.m.,  it  might  be  roughly 
spoken  of  as  either  'the  third'  or  'the  sixth'  hour. 
This  explanation,  too,  can  hardly  be  accepted.  Mr.  Wright 
shows  (op.  cit.)  that  such  startling  looseness  of  statement 
would  be  quite  contrary  to  the  accuracy  with  which  the 
Evangelists  appear  to  reckon  points  of  time  in  other 
places ;  also,  while  the  explanation  might  hold,  as 
Dr.  Sanday  says,  if  the  statements  were  inverted,  it 
can  hardly  stand,  seeing  that  St.  Mark  refers  to  the 
time  of  the  actual  Crucifixion,  St.  John  to  that  of  the 
passing  of  sentence.  It  must  also  be  remembered  that 
the  author  of  the  Fourth  Gospel  was  probably  acquainted 
with  the  details  of  the  Synoptic  outline. 

Putting  aside  these  and  other  attempts  to  reconcile  the 
two  statements,  it  might  naturally  appear  that  we  have 
here  another  instance  in  which  the  Fourth  Gospel,  with 
fuller  knowledge  of  the  facts,  corrects  an  error  in  the 


THE  PASSION  267 

Synoptic   account.     Yet   in  this   case   there  are   great 
objections  to  such  a  conclusion.     St.  John's  statement  Difficul- 
of  time  would  make  the  Crucifixion  not  begin  till  after  fcies  in 
the  forenoon ;   and  thus  his  account,  besides  being  in  g^£     * 
direct  conflict  with  the  statement  of  the  Synoptists  as  ment. 
to  the  duration  of  the  darkness,  hardly  allows  sufficient 
time  for  the  necessary  preparations  and  for  the  various 
events  related  in  connexion  with  the  Crucifixion. 

We  seem  therefore  reduced  to  the  supposition  of  a  Conclu- 
false  reading  in  one  or  other  of  our  authorities.  In  that  sion. 
case,  for  the  reasons  already  given,  it  seems  more 
probable  that  the  error  has  arisen  in  the  statement 
of  St.  John.  The  chief  objection  to  accepting  the 
Marcan  account,  which  would  make  the  Crucifixion 
begin  at  the  third  hour,  i.e.  9  a.m.,  is  that  it  seems 
rather  to  limit  the  time  required  for  all  the  events 
narrated  between  daybreak  and  the  actual  Crucifixion. 
In  fact,  as  Dr.  Sanday  concludes,  '  The  whole  question 
must  be  left  open :  there  is  a  choice  of  possibilities  but 
nothing  more.' 


CHAPTEE  XVII 

THE  RISEN  CHRIST 

The  Authorities.— General  Considerations. —Fraud  of  Hierarchy. 
— Appearance  to  Mary  Magdalene,  Disciples  on  Road  to 
Enimaus,  The  Ten  and  others,  The  Eleven. — Post-Resurrec- 
tion Teaching. — Appearances  in  Galilee.— The  Final  Charge 
(Matthew). — The  Final  Departure  (Luke). 

Mark  xvi.  1-8 ;  Matthew  xxviii ;  Luke  xxiv ; 
John  xx,  xxi. 


The 

Resurrec- 
tion. 


Our 

Authori- 
ties. 


This  work  lays  no  claim  to  be  a  treatise  on  Apologetics. 
We  do  not  therefore  purpose  to  discuss  in  detail  the 
evidences  for  the  Resurrection.  Yet  in  view  of  its 
unique  importance  some  consideration  of  the  attestation, 
on  which  the  historic  fact  of  the  Resurrection  of  Jesus 
rests,  seems  essential. 

A  few  words  must  first  be  said  as  to  the  authorities 
on  which  we  are  dependent.  Now  in  regard  to  the 
Resurrection  our  Gospel  records  prove  to  be  disappoint- 
ingly meagre  and  fragmentary.  The  chief  reason  for 
this  is  that  here  the  Marcan  source  fails  us.  Whatever 
be  the  true  facts  as  to  the  original  ending  of  our  Second 
Gospel,  one  thing  alone  is  certain,  that  it  is  now  com- 
pletely lost  to  us.  The  Gospel,  as  we  have  it,  breaks 
off  abruptly  at  the  close  of  verse  8  of  chapter  xvi.  The 
present  appendix  is  little   more  than  a  cento   of  the 


THE  RISEN  CHRIST  269 

appearances  related  in  the  other  Gospels.  It  was 
probably  added  to  complete  the  unfinished  record  from 
the  account  of  some  later  disciple.  This  disciple  we 
have  now  grounds,  sufficient  in  view  of  the  complete 
lack  of  other  evidence,  for  identifying  with  Ariston  or 
Aristion,  one  of  the  disciples  of  the  Lord  mentioned  by 
Papias.  How  the  Marcan  source  originally  ended  we 
can  only  conjecture.  There  is  at  least  some  probability 
that  it  included  appearances  of  the  Risen  Jesus  in  Galilee, 
since  Mark  xiv.  28  contains  the  prediction,  '  After  I  am 
raised  up,  I  will  go  before  you  into  Galilee,'  a  passage 
which  is  also  found  in  St.  Matthew,  but  passed  over 
by  St.  Luke,  whose  account  confines  the  post-Resur- 
rection appearances  to  Jerusalem;  while  in  Mark 
xvi.  7  the  angel  at  the  tomb  bids  the  women,  '  But 
go,  tell  His  disciples  and  Peter,  He  goeth  before  you 
into  Galilee :  there  shall  ye  see  Him,  as  He  said 
unto  you.' 

We  should  expect  to  find  the  Marcan  source  most 
fully  preserved  by  St.  Matthew,  since  he  follows  it 
closely  throughout  the  narrative  of  the  Passion.  It  is 
possible  indeed  that  some  of  its  contents  lie  imbedded 
in  the  narrative  of  our  First  Gospel ;  but  the  Matthean 
account  of  the  Resurrection,  as  regards  its  general 
character,  gives  us  the  impression  of  being  much  com- 
pressed ;  and  seems  also,  as  in  the  account  of  the 
Passion,  to  contain  traces  of  a  legendary  element.  Yet 
as  to  the  facts  of  appearances  in  Galilee  it  receives  the 
support  of  St.  John.  St.  Luke  clearly  had  access  to 
independent  sources  of  information  as  to  the  appearances 
at  Jerusalem.  These  sources,  or  one  of  them,  may 
have  been  the  same  as  those  which  he  had  used  in  his 
history  of  the  Passion.  Dr.  Sanday  suggests  that  his 
information  may  be  traced  to  Joanna,  the  wife  of  Chuza, 


270    OUTLINES  OF  THE  SYNOPTIC  RECORD 


General 
Considera- 
tions as 
to  Credi- 
bility. 
The  Testi- 
mony of 
St.  Paul 
and  the 
Early 
Church. 


The  In- 
ternal 
Consis- 
tency of 
the  Gospel 
Accounts. 


Herod's  steward ;  but  perhaps  this  is  further  than  we 
can  safely  go. 

St.  John's  narrative  of  the  Resurrection  is  clearly 
intended,  as  in  other  cases,  to  be  supplementary  to 
those  of  the  earlier  Evangelists,  and  is,  as  usual,  more 
didactic  in  character.  Yet  here,  too,  his  record  of  the 
events  is  so  vivid  and  detailed  in  many  places,  as  for 
instance  in  regard  to  the  interviews  of  Jesus  with  Mary 
Magdalene  and  Thomas,  that  we  may  confidently  ascribe 
it  to  first-hand  information. 

In  estimating  the  trustworthiness  of  the  Gospel  account 
of  the  Resurrection,  as  a  whole,  one  or  two  considerations 
of  a  general  character  deserve  attention. 

1.  Our  earliest  evidence  for  the  Resurrection  is  to  be 
sought  not  in  the  Gospels  but  in  the  Epistles  of  St.  Paul. 
Apart  from  his  testimony  to  the  universal  acceptance 
of  the  fact  in  the  Early  Church,  he  would  seem  to  give 
in  1  Corinthians  (ch.  xv)  a  list  of  the  appearances  com- 
monly known  to  the  Christian  tradition  of  the  time. 
Whatever  view,  too,  we  hold  as  to  the  historical 
character  of  the  speeches  in  the  early  chapters  of  the 
Acts  of  the  Apostles,  it  is  almost  beyond  question  that 
the  Resurrection  of  Jesus  formed  from  the  very  first 
the  central  theme  of  the  witness  of  the  Apostles.  It 
is  necessary  therefore  in  some  way  to  account  for  the 
genesis  of  the  belief,  since  it  is  not  enough  to  consider 
only  the  difficulties  raised  by  its  acceptance.  We  have 
to  weigh  these  against  those  involved  in  adopting  any 
of  the  other  theories  put  forward  to  account  for  its 
origin. 

2.  Fragmentary,  and  in  many  ways  unsatisfactory, 
as  are  our  accounts  of  the  Resurrection,  we  may  yet 
recognize  a  certain  internal  consistency  in  their  presenta- 
tion of  the  facts.     They  give  us  throughout,  as  Bishop 


THE  RISEN  CHRIST  271 

Westcott  has  pointed  out,  a  history  not  of  the  Resurrec- 
tion itself,  but  of  the  appearances  of  the  Risen  Christ1. 
All  agree  in  representing  Jesus,  after  the  Resurrection, 
as  still  retaining  the  marks  of  His  personal  identity. 
He  appears  as  no  mere  unsubstantial  phantom,  such  as 
the  figure  of  Samuel  brought  up  by  the  witch  of  Endor. 
He  can  be  recognized  by  the  tone  of  His  voice  and  by 
familiar  gestures.  'See,'  He  says,  'My  hands  and  My  Lukexxiv. 
feet,  that  it  is  I  Myself  :  handle  Me,  and  see  ;  for  a  spirit  * 
hath  not  flesh  and  bones,  as  ye  behold  Me  having.'  Yet 
He  is  not  merely  raised  again,  like  Lazarus,  to  the 
conditions  of  human  life ;  He  is  visible  and  invisible 
at  will ;  He  is  not  always  recognized  at  once ;  He 
appears  free  from  the  limitations  of  matter  and  space. 
This  general  picture  is  in  outline  the  same  in  all  accounts. 
This  internal  consistency  is  noticeable,  since,  in  such 
a  case,  the  writers  could  obviously  have  had  no  literary 
precedent  to  guide  them  in  forming  their  conception  of 
the  nature  of  the  Risen  Christ. 

3.  One  last  point  more  directly  concerns  us,  the  effect  The  Effect 
on  the  conduct  of  the  Apostles  of  their  belief  in  their  An  th,® 
Master's  Resurrection.  We  have  seen  repeatedly  how 
completely  they  had  failed  to  grasp  His  predictions  of 
His  Passion  and  Resurrection.  They  were  quite  unable 
to  enter  into  the  conception  of  the  Messiah  thus  pre- 
sented to  them.  Undoubtedly  the  Crucifixion  came  as 
a  complete  shock  to  their  hopes.  We  should  naturally 
expect  the  recovery  from  such  a  blow  to  have  been 
only  gradual  ;    yet  all  accounts  show  it  to  have  been 

1  St.  Matthew's  narrative  (xxviii.  2-4)  does  indeed  appear  to 
violate  this  restriction,  by  describing  the  earthquake  and  the 
descent  of  the  angel  to  roll  away  the  stone  ;  in  fact,  his  record 
approaches  more  nearly  in  character  to  that  of  the  Apocryphal 
Gospel  of  Peter. 


272    OUTLINES  OF  THE  SYNOPTIC  RECORD 

sudden  and  complete.  The  belief  that  their  Master 
was  living  was  firmly  established  in  their  minds  within 
a  few  weeks.  Not  only  is  their  former  timidity  and 
vacillation  gone,  but  we  find  in  their  subsequent  attitude 
a  new  insight  into  the  principles  of  Jesus ;  a  fresh  light 
has,  as  it  were,  been  thrown  for  them  on  the  Old  Testa- 
ment record.  The  idea  of  a  suffering  Messiah,  which 
had  lain  quite  beyond  their  mental  horizon,  now  finds 
for  them  its  true  place  as  fulfilled  in  the  life  of  Jesus ; 
the  materialistic  expectations  as  to  the  Kingdom  of 
God  have  almost  disappeared.  The  Crucifixion  alone 
could  hardly  account  for  this  new  insight.  They  them- 
selves imply  that  it  came  from  the  explanations  of  Jesus 
Himself.  These,  indeed,  would  be  but  a  continuance 
of  the  former  teaching  ;  yet  now  its  meaning  was  grasped 
by  them,  as  it  had  never  been  before,  in  the  light  of 
actual  facts.  St.  Luke,  at  least,  clearly  suggests  that 
this  was  the  central  subject  of  the  post-Resurrection 
discourses  of  Jesus. 
The  Order      In  considering  the  narratives  more   in   detail,  it  is 

of  the  Ap-  imp0SSibie  to  draw  up  with  certainty  a  consistent  account 
pearances.        r  . 

from  the  different  traditions  which  have  come  down  to 

us.     These  fall  naturally  into  two  groups,  which  place 

the  scene  of  the  appearances  in  Jerusalem  and  Galilee 

respectively.     For  the  former  the  chief  authority  is  the 

independent  tradition  used  by  St.  Luke,  while  we  have 

seen  that  the  account  of  the  appearances  in  Galilee  is 

to  be  traced,  probably,  to   the   Marcan  source.     This 

latter  tradition,  which  was  followed   in   the  main  by 

St.  Matthew,  survives  also  in  St.  John  xxi. 

Though  the  events  of   the  day  of  Resurrection  are 

related  in  detail,  we  are  not  in  a  position  to  determine 

the   exact   order   of   their   occurrence.      The   following 

summary  gives  at  least  a  possible  reconstruction : — 


THE  RISEN  CHRIST  273 

The  party  of  women  going  before  dawn  to  embalm  The 
the  body — a  duty  which  the  intervention  of  the  Sabbath  ^Fh-st* 
had    prevented    them    from    performing    earlier — were  Easter 
astonished  on  reaching  the  tomb  to  find  the  stone  rolled     ay* 
away.     On  entering  it  they  were  met  by  a  vision  of  coming 
1  two  young  men  in  white,'  one  of  whom  announced  to  °Jlthe 
them  that  Jesus  was  risen  and  bade  them  carry  the  to  the 
news  to  His  disciples  and  Peter.    Thereupon  the  women  Tomb- 
fled  in  terror,  too  frightened  to  impart  to  any  one  what  1  _gr    XV1, 
they  had  seen  until  they  reached  the  city.     There  their  Matt, 
story  soon  spread  among  the  disciples :    to  suppose,  as  xx™' 
St.  Mark's  incomplete  record  might  suggest,  that  they  Lukexxiv. 
kept  their  news  a  complete  secret  would  be  contrary  to  J~^jj  xx 
all  experience  of  female  nature.    Our  First  Gospel  indeed  1,  2. 
states  that  on  their  way  they  met  Jesus  Himself,  but 
the  narrative  bears  such  evident  traces  of  compression  y.       f 
that  little  stress  can  be  laid  on  its  details,  contradicted  Peter  and 
as  it  is  in  this  point  by  the  incidental  statement  of  m0hrJ to 
Cleopas  in   St.  Luke  xxiv.  24.      Mary  Magdalene  alone  John  xx. 

carries  the  report  to  Peter  and  John,  who  were  possibly  J-1,0,    CL 
*  r  J  Luke  xxiv. 

together,  residing   apart   from   the   main  body  of   the  12. 

disciples.     On  hearing  the  news  they  ran  to  the  tomb  APPef r- 
*■  °  J  ance  to 

to    learn    the   state   of   things   for   themselves.      Mary  Mary  Mag- 
Magdalene  follows  them  more  slowly,  and,  while  she  is  dalene. 

-,.  T  n  John  xx. 

standing  at  the  tomb,  Jesus  first  appears  to  her.  11-18. 

St.  Matthew,  having  related  that  a  guard  had  been  Fraud 
set  to  watch  the  tomb,  had  in  some  way  to  dispose  of  archy. 
the  soldiers  ;  this  he  does  by  narrating  how  the  watchers,  Matt, 
terrified  by  the  earthquake  and  the  appearance  of  the  JJj^' 
angel    from    heaven,    went   and    told  what    they   had 
witnessed  to  the  Chief  Priests.    The  Hierarchy  on  hearing 
their  story  bribed  them  to  spread  the  report  that  the 
disciples  had  come,  while  they  slept,  and  stolen  away 
the  body  of  Jesus.     '  This  saying,'  adds  the  Evangelist, 

T 


274     OUTLINES  OF  THE  SYNOPTIC  RECORD 

'was  spread  abroad  among  the  Jews,  and  continueth 
until  this  day.'    This  at  least  may  show  the  explanation 
by  which  the  enemies  of  Jesus  sought  later  to  meet  the 
evidence  afforded  by  the  empty  tomb. 
The  Ap-  Meanwhile   the   disciples,  walking  to   Emmaus,   had 

oiTroad^o  near(l  the  tidings  of  the  women  before  they  left  the  city  ; 
Emmaus.  but  the  appearance  to  Mary  Magdalene  was  not  yet 
13-35XX1V  known  to  them.  Only  on  their  return  did  they  learn 
of  the  appearance  to  Peter,  which  is  also  mentioned  by 
St.  Paul  (1  Cor.  xv.  5).  St.  Luke  relates  the  circum- 
stances of  the  meeting  of  Jesus  with  these  two  in  such 
detail  as  to  render  it  likely  that  his  narrative  is  based 
on  first-hand  information.  The  suggestion1  that  it  is 
to  be  traced  to  the  nameless  companion  of  Cleopas  is 
at  any  rate  very  plausible.  The  late  Mr.  Latham  con- 
cludes from  their  way  of  speaking  of  Jesus  that  these 
two  belonged  to  the  circle  of  Jewish  disciples.  The 
picture  of  them,  as  they  walked  conversing  in  such 
eager  tones  as  to  attract  attention,  together  with  the 
mingled  disappointment  and  bewilderment  which  find 
expression  in  the  words  of  Cleopas  '  But  we  hoped  that 
it  was  he  which  should  redeem  Israel,'  throw  an  interest- 
ing side-light  on  the  state  of  the  disciples  on  the  day 
of  the  Resurrection.  The  story  gives  us  the  fullest 
description  that  we  have  of  the  Person  and  dealings 
of  Jesus  after  the  Resurrection.  There  is  much,  both  in 
the  tone  of  authority  which  He  adopts,  and  the  character 
of  the  teaching,  which  recalls  the  Jesus  of  the  earlier 
narrative.  As  if  He  were  resuming  the  subject  of  His 
former  discourses,  He  opens  their  minds  to  a  truer 
understanding  of  the  Scriptures,  by  showing  once  more 
how  they  pointed   to   the  necessity  that   'the  Christ 

1  Latham,  The  Risen  Master,  p.  103. 


THE  RISEN  CHRIST  275 

should  suffer  these  things,  and  enter  into  His  glory.' 

Their  recognition  of  Him  in  the  breaking  of  bread  is 

important,  since  it  shows  that   this   act  was   so   well 

known   as  distinctive   of  Jesus   as  to   be  a   means  of 

recognition  even  by  those  who  were  not  present  at  the 

Institution   of   the  Eucharist.     As   soon   as   He   made 

Himself  known  to  them,  without  waiting,  they  returned 

at  once  the  same  evening  to  Jerusalem  to  carry  their 

news  to  the  disciples  assembled  in  the  Upper  Room. 

There  they  found  the  Ten,  Thomas  alone  being  absent,  The  Ap- 

with   other   disciples,  and  learned  from   them    of    the  feaJuan™e 
r      '  to  the  Ten 

appearance  to  Peter.     While  they  were  discussing  what  and  others 
had  occurred,  Jesus  Himself  appeared  in  the  midst  of  a^     u" 
them.     This  first  appearance  to  the  body  of  disciples  is  Luke  xxiv. 
related  by  both  St.  Luke  and  St.  John.   "  ?6~43-   Cf- 

J  John  xx. 

St.  John  relates  a  second  appearance  of  Jesus  a  week  19-23. 
later   to   the   assembled   disciples,   when   Thomas  was  Appear- 

*x  n  c  g  to  t  ll  6 

among  the  number,  at  which  the  doubts  of  that  disciple  Eleven 
were  removed  by  ocular  proof  of  the  bodily  resurrection.  (*• e- 

What  follows  in  St.  Luke  (xxiv.  44-49)  would  seem  j0hn°xx.S 
to  contain  a  summary  narrative  of  the  teaching  given  24-29. 
by  Jesus  at  intervals  in  the  course  of  the  ensuing  forty  0fm™*r^ 
days.    We  notice  that  throughout  this  Evangelist  shows  Resur- 
no  knowledge  of  the  appearances  in  Galilee,  though  one  T^chi 
incident  in  his  narrative,  that  of  Jesus  eating  before  Luke  xxiv. 
them,  may  be  due  to  a  reminiscence  of  the  subsequent  mkeix" 
appearance  by  the  Lake  of  Galilee  related  in  St.  John  xxi.  41~i8. 

When  we  turn  to  the  history  of  the  appearances  in  The  Ap- 
Galilee,  the  meagre  and  fragmentary  character  of  our  f^^Slee 
information  becomes  more  marked.  We  here  lose  the 
help  of  the  valuable  tradition  preserved  in  St.  Luke. 
We  have  seen,  from  two  allusions,  that  the  Marcan 
source  knew  of  a  prediction  of  Jesus  that  after  His 
Resurrection  He  would  meet  the  disciples  in  Galilee. 


276     OUTLINES  OF  THE  SYNOPTIC  RECORD 


Appear- 
ance by 
the  Lake. 
John  xxi. 
1-23. 


Appear- 
ance on 
'the 

mountain 
in  Galilee, 
Matt. 
xxviii. 
16,  17. 


The  Final 
Charge 
and  Close 
of  Appear- 
ances ac- 
cording to 
St.  Mat- 
thew. 


The  command  to  return  to  the  scene  of  their  earlier  in- 
tercourse may  have  been  repeated  at  one  of  the  appear- 
ances in  Jerusalem.  It  would  seem,  from  the  narrative 
in  St.  John  xxi,  that  on  their  return  the  disciples 
resumed  their  old  occupation  of  fishing.  Mr.  Latham 
has  shown  how  it  would  be  in  accordance  with  the  usual 
methods  of  Jesus,  and  His  considerateness  for  the  needs 
of  His  followers,  to  afford  them  such  an  opportunity 
for  quiet  and  recuperation,  mental  and  physical,  after 
the  strain  of  the  trying  experiences  through  which  they 
had  passed.  If  St.  Luke  has,  as  was  suggested  in  an 
earlier  chapter,  confused  the  appearance  in  St.  John  xxi 
with  the  occasion  of  the  first  call  of  the  disciples,  it  is 
a  further  proof  how  imperfect  was  his  knowledge  of  the 
appearances  in  Galilee.  Were  it  not  for  the  appendix 
to  St.  John's  Gospel  (which  linguistic  grounds  show  to 
be  from  the  same  hand  as  the  rest  of  the  Gospel),  we 
should  know  from  the  Gospels  of  no  appearance  in 
Galilee  except  that  in  the  closing  scene  related  by 
St.  Matthew.  Our  First  Gospel  narrates  that  Jesus 
appeared  to  the  eleven  disciples  on  '  the  mountain  where 
He  had  appointed  them.'  If  we  identify  this  appearance 
with  that  alluded  to  by  St.  Paul  '  to  above  five  hundred 
brethren  at  once'  (1  Cor.  xv.  6),  there  must  have  been 
others  present  on  this  occasion.  Only  in  Galilee  could 
so  large  a  number  as  five  hundred  disciples  be  collected. 
The  presence  of  others  besides  the  eleven  would  account 
for  the  statement  that  '  some  doubted.' 

There  Jesus  addresses  to  them  His  solemn  parting 
words ;  claiming  that  all  Divine  authority,  in  heaven 
and  on  earth,  has  been  committed  to  Him,  He  sends 
them  forth  with  the  commission  to  make  disciples  of  all 
the  nations,  He  ordains  baptism  as  the  rite  of  admission  to 
His  Society,  lays  down  the  rules  for  its  members,  '  teach- 


THE  RISEN  CHRIST  277 

ing  them  to  observe  all  things  whatsoever  I  commanded  Matt. 

vii: 
-20. 


you,'    and   closes  with  the   promise   of   His   continual  *gVU 


Presence  with  them,  '  Lo  I  am  with  you  all  the  days, 
even  unto  the  consummation  of  the  age.'  The  words, 
no  doubt,  are  but  a  summary  of  the  final  charge.  It  is 
generally  considered  that  the  full  baptismal  formula  has 
been  introduced  here  from  the  usage  of  the  later  Church, 
since,  at  any  rate,  it  was  not  that  used,  according  to 
the  Acts,  in  Apostolic  days.  Yet  the  Gospel  of  the 
Jewish  Messiah  and  the  Kingdom  of  Heaven  finds  a 
fitting  close  in  this  claim  of  the  Risen  Christ  to  a 
universal  dominion,  as  the  basis  of  a  world-wide  com- 
mission, linked  with  the  promise  of  His  own  age-long 
Spiritual  Presence  with  His  followers. 

St.  Luke  places  the  close  of   the  appearances  at  a  Close  of 
gathering  upon  the   Mount  of   Olives.     Jesus  led  His  aifc^gaac- 
disciples  out  from  the  city  to  Bethany,  and  there  parted  cording  to 
from  them  in  the  act  of  blessing.     Whether  more  than  j^k^xxiv 
the  Eleven  were  present  on  this  occasion  is  not  made  50-53. 
clear  by  St.  Luke's  narrative,  either  in  the  Gospel  or 
the  Acts.     In  fact,  his  record  of  the  events  after  the 
day  of  Resurrection  is,  in  the  Gospel,  brief  and  vague ; 
it  contains  no  notes  of  time,  and  gives  no  indication  how 
long  an  interval  elapsed  between  the  Resurrection  and 
the  final  departure.     The  Ascension,  according  to  the 
true  text,  finds  no  place  in  the  Gospel ;   it  forms  the 
opening  scene  of  the  history  in  the  Acts.     Yet  St.  Luke 
clearly  implies  that  the  disciples  recognized  that  with 
the  parting  on  the  Mount  of  Olives  the  series  of  appear- 
ances of  the  Risen  Jesus  was  ended.     They  knew  that 
thenceforward  their  Master  would  be  with  them  no  more 
in    bodily  presence.     They  returned   to   Jerusalem   to 
await  there  the  promised  endowment  of  the  Spirit  for 
their  future  work. 

t  3 


278    OUTLINES  OF  THE  SYNOPTIC  RECORD 

With  the  final  departure  the  story  of  the  ministry  of 
Jesus  closes.  Thenceforward,  His  mission  upon  earth 
passes  into  the  world-wide  mission  of  His  Church.  He 
had  carried  out  the  Father's  purpose,  'having  accom- 
plished the  work  which  He  gave  Him  to  do  ' ;  now  it 
was  left  to  His  followers  to  carry  on,  under  the  guidance 
of  the  Spirit,  the  work  which  Jesus  had  begun  on  earth. 
He,  by  His  life  and  teaching,  had  laid  the  foundation, 
on  which  men  have  been  building  ever  since. 


INDEX 


Abomination  of  Desolation,  234- 

236. 
Abraham's  bosom,  210  f,  244. 
Ages,  doctrine  of  the  two,  233. 
Agreements  of  the  Synoptists, 

2-4. 
Almsgiving,  teaching   of  Jesus 

on,  94. 
Andrew,  70,  80. 
Anna,  39,  241. 
Annas,  trial  before,  254. 
Anointing,  at  Bethany,  215  f. 

by  a  sinner,  112. 
Anxiety,  teaching  of  Jesus  on, 

95. 
Apocalyptic,  243. 
Apostles,  meaning  of  term,  121  f. 
Aramaic,  4,  33. 
Ascension,  the,  247,  248,  277. 
Aspirants  to  discipleship.   120, 

163. 
Augustine,  6. 
Augustus,  decree  of,  47. 

Baptism,  53. 

of  Jesus,  57. 
Barabbas,  258. 
Bartimaeus,  214. 
Beatitudes,  91. 

Bethany,  215  f,  219,  220,  277. 
Bethlehem,  birth  of  Jesus  at,  40. 
Bethsaida,  23,  25,  26,  165,  181. 
Betrayal,  prophecy  of,  251. 
Borrowing  hypothesis,  6,  7. 
Burial  of  Jesus,  260. 

Caesar,  tribute  to,  222  f. 
Caesarea  Philippi,  182. 
Cana,  72,  77. 


Capernaum,  72,  81,  82,  83,  105, 

152,  165. 
Catechists,  20. 
Centurion  at  Cross,  260. 
Chagigah,  264. 
Charge,  the  final,  276. 

to  disciples,  28,  30. 
Child,  pattern  of,  197. 
Childhood,  episode  from,  42. 
Children,  blessing  of,  206  f. 
Chorazin,  25,  26,  165. 
Chronology,  32, 

of  last  week,  220  f. 

of  Passion,  261-267. 
Church,  183  f,  201. 
Circuit  of  Jesus  in  Galilee,  157. 
Circumcision,  of  Baptist,  36. 

of  Jesus,  38. 
Cleopas,  274. 
Combination    by  St.   Matthew, 

234. 
Combination  theory,  8-15. 
Common  source,  hypothesis  of, 

6f. 
Conflict,  period  of,  104. 
Crucifixion,  259. 

Dalmanutha,  179. 
Date  of  St.  Mark,  236. 
David,  116. 

son  of,  174,  214. 
Day  of  Judgement,  237, 242, 245  f. 
Decapolis,  142,  175. 
Dedication,  Feast  of,  215. 
Demoniacal  possession,  81. 
Desertion,  prophecy  of,  252. 
Deuteronomy  quoted,  67. 
Didactic   tendencies  of  Synop- 
tists, 1. 


280 


INDEX 


Disciples,  call  of,  11. 

first  call  of,  70. 

future  reward  of,  198. 

misunderstandir 

the  name,  120  f. 
Discipleship,  teaching  on,  185. 
Divorce,  question  on,  205. 
Doublets,  19-24. 

Easter  Day,  events  of,  273  f. 
Edersheim,  Dr.,  202,  note. 
Egypt,  flight  into,  40. 
Elijah,  53,  60,  66,  150,  153,  182, 

188,  190  ff. 
Elisabeth,  35  f. 
Elisha,  60,  150,  153. 
Emmaus,  appearance  on  road  to, 

274  f. 
Entry,  triumphal,  218  f. 
Eschatological  Discourses,  24. 
Eschatology,  232. 
Eucharist,  institution  of,  251  f. 

Fasting,  controversy  on,  113. 

teaching  of  Jesus  on,  94. 
Fatherhood  of  God,  88. 
Feet-washing,  the,  250. 
Fig-tree,  237,  239. 

cursing  of,  221  f, 
First  source,  16. 

Forgiveness  of  sins,  Jesus'  claim 
to,  105. 

teaching  on,  201  f. 

Galilee,  77,  157,  173,  176,  &c. 
appearances  of  Risen  Jesus  in, 

275. 
final  departure  of  Jesus  from, 

205. 
journey  through,  193. 
woes  on  cities  of,  165. 
Genealogies,  45  f. 
Gennesaretb,  170. 
Gerasenes,  142,  146. 
Gethsemane,  253  f. 
Great  insertion  in  St.  Luke,  13, 
27,  203  f. 

Hallelujah  Psalm,  219. 

Harmonists,  2. 

<  Hebrew »  Matthew,  33. 


Hermon,  Mount,  188. 

Herod  Antipas,  59,  63,  164,  182. 

leaven  of,  181. 

trial  of  Jesus  before,  257. 
Herod  the  Great,  40  f. 
Herodians,  118,  222,  230  f. 
Hierarchy,  fraud  of,  273. 
Hort,  Professor,  94,  184,  206. 
Hosea  vi.  6  quoted,  108,  116. 
Hours,  reckoning  of,  266. 
Humility,  teaching  on,  196. 
Hymn  of  praise,  26,  lo5  f. 

Infancy,  narratives  of  the,  22, 

34. 
Influence  of  disciples,  91. 
Inspiration,  2,  6,  18. 

Jairus,  146  ff. 

James,  son  of  Zebedee,  70,  80, 

148,  188,  213,  253. 
Jeremiah,  182. 
Jericho,  214. 
Jerusalem,  fall  of,  186,  235,  244, 

246. 
lament  over,  229. 
Joanna,  269. 
John,  son  of  Zebedee,  70,  80,  148. 

188,  197,  213,  253,  273. 
Gospel  of.  10,  32. 
John  the  Baptist,  17,  25,  26,  31, 

35,  36,  51  ff,  164,  243. 
Jollev,  Mr.,  29. 
Jonah,  sign  of,  180,  265. 
Joseph,  40-43. 
Joseph  of  Arimathaea,  260. 
Judaea,  150. 
Judas,  215  ff,  251,  254. 

Kingdom  of  God,  or  Heaven,  89- 
91,  240,  241,  244,  246. 

Lamp,  saying  as  to,  137. 
Latham,  Eev.  H.,  99,  190,  274, 

276. 
Law,  the,  Jesus'  attitude  to,  92  f. 
Lazarus,  raising  of,  214  f. 
Leper,  healing  of,  83. 
Levi,  call  of,  107. 
Lightfoot,  Bishop,  101. 
Logia,  24,  32,  238. 


INDEX 


281 


Lot,  240. 

Luke,  St.,  Gospel  of — 

composition  of,  1-33. 

order  of,  11. 

preface  to,  30,  34. 

relation  to  second  source,  27  f. 

use  of  Matthew,  22. 

Mark,  St.,  Gospel  of— 
appendix  to,  268  f. 
composition  of,  1-32. 
historicity  of,  12  f. 
order  of,  11. 

'  original  Mark '  theory  of,  21. 
Petrine  character  of,  9,  31  f. 
priority  of,  7-15. 
redundancy  of,  9-29. 
relation  to  first  source,  21-23. 
relation     to     second    source, 

29-30. 
style  of,  12,  22,  23. 
Martha,  215-217, 
Mary  Magdalene,  appearance  to, 

270,  273. 
Mary  of  Bethany,  215-217. 
Mary  the  Virgin,  35-43,  123. 
Matthew,  St.,  Gospel  of — 
abbreviation  in,  23,  29. 
combination  characteristic  of, 

28. 
composition  of,  1-33. 
order  of,  11. 

relation     to     second     source, 
27-28. 
Messiah,  question  of  Jesus  as  to, 

227. 
Messiahs,  false,  235. 
Millennium,  241. 
Miracles — 

healing  of  demoniacs,  13,  14. 
healing  of  nobleman's  son,  77. 
healing  of  centurion's  servant, 

25,  77-79. 
healing  of  leper,  29,  83. 
healing  of  paralytic  at  Caper- 
naum, 4,  5,  12,  22,  105. 
stilling  of  storm,  141. 
healing  of  Gerasene  demoniac, 

142-146. 
Jairus'    daughter   raised,    .13, 
146-149. 


Miracles  (continued) — 

healing  of  woman  with  issue 

of  blood,  147. 
raising  of  widow's  son,  150. 
feeding  of  five  thousand,   11, 

166-168. 
feeding     of    four    thousand, 

176-179. 

walking  on  the  water,  14,  169. 

healing     of     Syrophoenician 

woman's  daughter,  173-175. 

healing    of    deaf   and    dumb 

man,  175. 
healing  of  blind  man  at  Beth- 

saida,  23,  182. 
healing  of  epileptic  boy,  192  f. 
coin  in  fish's  mouth,  195. 
healing  of  Bartimaeus,  2,  214„ 
raising  of  Lazarus,  214  f. 
cursing  of  fig-tree,  1-2,  221. 
Mites,  the  widow's,  230. 
Moses,  66,  188,  190,  211. 

Nain,  150. 
Nathanael,  70. 
Nazareth,  41. 

rejection  at,  152-155. 
Nicodemus,  75,  260. 
Noah,  240. 

Offence,  causes  of,  205. 
Offences,  teaching  on,  199  ff. 
Olives,  Mount  of,  219,  277. 
Opposition  to  Jesus,  13-15. 
Oral  hypothesis,  15,  21,  26  f,  31. 
Outcasts,    intercourse   of    Je&us 


Papias,  24,  31-33. 

Parables — two  sons,  62. 

mustard  seed  and  leaven,  90, 

140. 
friend  at  midnight,  102. 
importunate  widow,  102. 
Pharisee   and  publican,    102, 

131. 
unmerciful  servant,  103,  202  f. 
lost  sheep,  108. 
lost  coin,  109. 
prodigal  son,  109. 
great  supper,  110,  227. 


282 


INDEX 


Parables  (continued) — 

wedding  garment,  111. 

two  debtors,  112. 

garment  and  wine-skins,  114. 

strong  man  armed,  124. 

man  possessed,  124. 

good  Samaritan,  130,  225. 

rich  man   and  Lazarus,    131, 
210,  244. 

ten  virgins,  131,  239. 

unrighteous      steward,      131, 
209 1 

sower,  136. 

tares,  138. 

draw-net,  138. 

hidden  treasure,  139. 

pearl  of  great  price,  139. 

seed  growing  secretly,  23. 

labourers  in  vineyard,  198  f. 

wicked  husbandmen,  226. 

talents,  130,  239. 

pounds,  130,  239. 

sheep  and  goats,  239. 
Paralytic,  bealing  of,  105. 
Parousia,  237. 

Passover,  72,  167,  216,  250  ff. 
Paul,  St.,  evidence  as  to  day  of 
Crucifixion,  263. 

on   institution    of   Eucharist, 
251. 

testimony  to  Resurrection,  270 
Pella,  236. 

Peter,  Simon,  70,  80,  147,  148, 
169,  171,  185,  188,  194-196, 
202,  222,  253,  254,  273. 

confession  of,  14,  182  184. 

denial  of,  foretold,  252. 

denials  of,  256. 

wife's  mother  healed,  82. 
Pharisees,  24,  54,  105,  109,  113, 
116,  117,  118,  123,  164,  170, 
179,  205,  219,  222,  242. 

denunciations  of,  228  f. 

leaven  of,  181. 

woes  pronounced  against,  21. 
Philip,  70. 

Philip  the  tetrarch,  182. 
Pilate,  239,  256-259,  260. 
Prayer — 

Lord's  Prayer,  27,  97-102. 

teaching  of  Jesus  on,  97-103. 


Precedence,  disputes  on,   196  f. 

250. 
Presentation  in  temple,  38. 
Priests,  chief,  215,  257. 
Prophecy,  243. 

Prophet,  meaning  of  term,  52. 
Publicans,  54,  107. 

Question    of    Jesus     about    the 
Messiah,  3. 

of  Pharisees,  3,  222  f. 

of  Sadducees,  3,  223  f. 

of  Scribes,  3,  224-226. 
Quirinius,  census  of,  47-50. 

Ramsay,  Professor,  48,  50,  266. 
Resurrection,  the,  242. 

authorities  for,  268-270. 

considerations  on  evidence  of. 
270-272. 

Jesus'  proof  of,  224. 
Ruler,  the  rich  young,  207  f. 

Sabbath,  the  115-117. 

miracles  on,  117,  118. 
Sadducees,  55,  242,  247. 

question  of,  3,  223  f. 
Salome,  213. 
Salt,  saying  as  to,  200. 
Samaria,  76. 
Sanday,  Professor,  46,  128,  136, 

180  note,  212  note,  218,  251, 

260,  264,  266,  267,  269. 
Sanhedrin,  trials    before,    254, 

256. 
Sayings  of  Jesus  not  recorded  in 

our  Gospels,  27. 
Scribe,  question  of,  3,  224-226. 

the,  instructed,  140. 
Scribes,  105,  108,  123,  170,  192. 

232. 
Secrecy,  injunctions  to,   13,  14, 

30. 
Selection   exercised   by   Synop- 

tists,  3. 
Sermon  on  the  Mount,  1, 12,  21, 

24,  28,  86  ff. 
Seventy,    mission    of,    159-161. 

253. 
Sheba,  Queen  of,  180. 
Shema,  224. 


INDEX 


283 


Shepherds,    announcement    to, 

37  f. 
Sidon,  173. 

Sign,  request  for,  179  f. 
Signs  of  the  time,  239. 
Siloam,  239. 
Simeon,  38,  39,  211. 
Similitudes,  131. 
Simon  the  leper,  215. 
Sinners,  107. 
Smith,  Profes 
Solomon,  180. 

psalms  of,  39,  45. 
Son  of  Man,  245. 
Sufferings,    prediction    of,    184, 

194^  212. 
Supper,  the  last,  250. 
Swete,  Professor,  186. 
Syrophoenician  woman,  173-175. 

Tabernacles,  feast  of,  215. 
Tatian's  Diatessaron,  73. 
Teaching  of  Jesus,  86  ff. 
Temple,  233. 


Temple,  cleansing  of,  72-75. 

encounters  in,  222. 
Temptation  of  Jesus,  65-70. 
Tradition,  dispute  on,  170-172. 
Transfiguration,  187-19). 
Tribute,  question  as  to,  222  f. 

temple,  194. 
Twelve,  appointment  of,  120. 

mission  of,  157-161. 
Tyre,  173. 

Wealth,  teaching  on,  208  f. 
Weiss,  Dr.,  29. 

Westcott,  Bishop,  264,  265,  271. 
Wise  men  from  East,  40. 
Women,  attendant,  261. 
on  road  to  Cross,  259. 
Words,  importance  of,  125. 
Wright,  Eev.  A.,  20  f,  23,  261, 
264,  265,  266. 

Zacchaeus,  108,  214. 
Zacharias,  35-37. 
Zechariah  ix.  9  quoted,  219. 


OXFORD  :     HORACE    HART 
PRINTER   TO    THE    UNIVERSI1Y 


Date  Due 


Mr  9     Hk 


H  22  '43 


0E8   "52 


.<«t««»*Mf 


•emmm 


